ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2025
Synthetic electrocardiograms for Brugada syndrome: from data generation to expert cardiologists evaluation.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- AI-ECG classification for Brugada syndrome: A study of machine learning techniques to optimise for limited datasets.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Synthetic electrocardiograms (ECGs) for inherited cardiac diseases may overcome the issue related to data scarcity for artificial intelligence (AI)-based algorithms. This study aimed to evaluate experienced cardiologists' ability to differentiate synthetic and real Brugada ECGs. Methods and results: A total of 2244 ECG instances (50% synthetic generated by a generative adversarial network, 50% real Brugada patients' ECGs) were evaluated by 7 cardiologists, each with >15 years of experience. All ECGs were standard 12-lead recordings acquired with identical settings (paper speed 25 mm/s, amplitude 10 mm/mV) and randomly assigned without identifying markers. The examination was blinded and conducted in 2 rounds with at least 2 h gap between rounds to assess potential learning effects and intra-rater reliability. Each physician classified the recordings as 'real' or 'synthetic' without having any additional information. Performance metrics, including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and intra-rater reliability (Cohen's Kappa), were analyzed. Brugada syndrome (BrS) specialists' repeated evaluations were characterized by low accuracy (first round 40%, second round 42%), specificity (first round 22%, second round 26%) and sensitivity (first round 58%, second round 58%). Intra-rater reliability varied widely (Cohen's Kappa: -0.12 to 0.80). Conclusion: Synthetic Brugada ECGs cannot be adequately distinguished from real patients' ECGs by BrS specialists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.