SynthesisOpen heart2025
Artificial intelligence capabilities in identifying atrial fibrillation using baseline sinus rhythm ECG : a systematic review.
Synthesis in Open heart, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Echocardiographic Factors Associated With AI-Estimated Atrial Fibrillation Likelihood During Sinus Rhythm in Patients With Documented Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Prediction and Detection of Atrial Fibrillation from Sinus-Rhythm Electrocardiograms and Ambulatory Monitoring.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Navigating the intelligence revolution: transforming cardiovascular care through AI-driven innovation.Open heart · 2026Article
- 12-lead electrocardiogram-based artificial intelligence model accurately predicts near-term atrial fibrillation in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source.Heart rhythm O2 · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent arrhythmia associated with adverse outcomes, often presenting paroxysmally. The lack of an efficient method to promptly detect paroxysmal AF and the absence of a unified screening approach necessitate exploring novel solutions. Artificial intelligence (AI) models show promise in addressing this gap, enabling early intervention. This study assessed the effectiveness of AI in detecting AF using baseline sinus rhythm-ECG (SR-ECG) and factors influencing their performance.
methodsA systematic review was conducted across eight databases and registries (International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) registration: INPLASY202530059). References up to May 2024 were double-screened for eligibility. Included studies used AI to detect AF from baseline SR-ECGs in patients without prior AF confirmation. Quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Performance metrics were summarised using medians with subgroup analyses by AI type and AF confirmation timeframe.
results14 studies and 33 AI models were analysed. Participant data were available for 13 studies, totalling 1459653 patients, with one study providing only testing dataset data. Median (95% CI) performance metrics were: accuracy 58.0% (55.0 to 62.0), sensitivity 62.0% (57.0 to 70.2), specificity 57.8% (51.0 to 61.1), precision 52.0% (47.0 to 56.0) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.740 (0.630 to 0.830). Deep learning (DL) models outperformed traditional machine learning in sensitivity (72.6% vs 54.5%; q=0.027) and AUC (0.830 vs 0.610; q<0.001). Models using a 31-day confirmation window showed higher accuracy (83.2% vs 56.0%; q=0.010) and AUC (0.851 vs 0.630; q<0.001) than those using a 1-year timeframe. 11 studies (78.6%) cited possible negative cases misclassification as a limitation, and nine (64.3%) were deemed 'high risk of bias' in at least one domain.
conclusionsAI-enhanced SR-ECG for identifying AF patients holds growing potential. Our findings show that DL and models incorporating a 31-day confirmation window are more effective in this context. Further research is needed to explore clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness.
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.