ArticleOpen heart2025
Risk stratification of chest pain in the emergency department using artificial intelligence applied to electrocardiograms.
Article in Open heart, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- On-Device ECG and Vital-Sign Prediction of 24-Hour Mortality and Unplanned ICU Admission in Emergency Department Patients: A Retrospective Evaluation of MEDI-AI.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advances in the Interpretation of the Electrocardiogram by Artificial Intelligence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Optimizing Acute Chest Pain Management: Navigating Diagnostic Challenges and Advancing Precision Care.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite standardised approaches, subjective assessment and inconsistent diagnostic testing for chest pain in the emergency department (ED) drive costs, disparities and adverse outcomes. Artificial intelligence offers potential to automate and improve risk stratification. METHODS AND
resultsUsing a retrospective cohort of 15 048 patients presenting to the ED of a tertiary care hospital, we trained a neural network classifier ('Chest Pain-AI' or 'CP-AI') to predict a 7-day composite endpoint of major cardiovascular diagnoses including myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, aortic dissection and all-cause mortality. Inputs to CP-AI included age, sex, cardiac biomarkers (D-dimer or troponin I or T positivity) and numerical representations of presenting 12-lead ECGs. ECG representations were derived using a publicly available deep learning model known as patient contrastive learning of representations. In an external validation set of 14 476 patients, we evaluated CP-AI against comparator models, including a 'Biomarker Model' incorporating clinical data (age, sex, biomarker positivity), based on both the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). CP-AI outperformed the Biomarker Model in prediction of the 7-day composite endpoint with an AUROC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.83) vs 0.79 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.81) and an AUPRC of 0.46 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.49) vs 0.35 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.37) (p<0.05 for both comparisons).
conclusionsCP-AI, a fully automated neural network classifier, demonstrated superior performance in the prediction of 7-day major cardiovascular diagnoses for patients presenting with acute chest pain compared with conventional models trained on demographics and cardiac biomarkers. CP-AI may standardise and expedite risk stratification of patients presenting to the ED with chest pain.
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.