ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Multisite, External Validation of an AI-Enabled ECG Algorithm for Detection of Low Ejection Fraction.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. 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.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence-Based Electrocardiography for the Detection of Heart Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Advances in the Interpretation of the Electrocardiogram by Artificial Intelligence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiography for assessment of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in the era of foundation models.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow left ventricular ejection fraction (LEF) can progress undiagnosed. Artificial intelligence-based electrocardiogram (ECG-AI) screening may provide a scalable means to detect LEF.
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to validate a complete ECG-AI software as a medical device for LEF detection.
methodsFour geographically diverse sites in the United States identified patients with both ECGs and transthoracic echocardiograms performed within 30 days of each other in clinical practice. Data were electronically extracted to specific guidelines and transmitted to the coordinating center for analysis.
resultsRecords of 16,000 subjects were extracted, resulting in an evaluable set of 13,960 subjects (mean age 66 years; 52% male). The device demonstrated excellent discrimination (AUROC: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.91-0.93]) and was 84.5% (95% CI: 82.2%-86.6%) sensitive and 83.6% (95% CI: 82.9%-84.2%) specific for LEF. The overall prevalence of LEF in the study data set was 7.9%, with LEF among 1.6% of the ECG-AI negative and 30.5% of ECG-AI positive subjects, contributing to positive and negative predictive values of 30.5% (95% CI: 28.8%-32.1%) and 98.4% (95% CI: 98.2%-98.7%), respectively.
conclusionsExternal validation studies such as this one provide a rigorous framework to validate an algorithm's performance. This study demonstrated the algorithm's strong diagnostic accuracy over a geographically diverse, independent set of patients. In this generally unselected population, the algorithm produced a test negative result in 78% of the cases, suggesting potential utility as a rule-out strategy to defer echocardiography when other clinical findings are absent.
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.