ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2026
Predicting Occlusion Myocardial Infarctions in the Emergency Department Using Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improved Detection of Acute Coronary Occlusion Myocardial Infarction by an Artificial Intelligence Electrocardiogram Model in Swedish Emergency Departments.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026Article
- Comment on "The efficacy of artificial intelligence in predicting mortality rate and cardiogenic shock in acute coronary syndrome patients".International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model for predicting acute coronary occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) in patients with chest pain at the emergency department (ED), using information that is widely available early in the ED assessment. Methods: In a cohort of 24,511 consecutive adult ED patients with chest pain from 5 Swedish hospitals, OMI cases were identified through register data and manual review of health records and angiographies. Ambulance patients bypassing the ED due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were not included in the cohort. A deep-learning AI model was created to predict OMI using the electrocardiogram, optionally combined with other early ED data, including medical history and initial lab values. The model was internally validated on held-out data and compared with the STEMI criteria. Results: A total of 467 patients (1.9%) were identified as OMI, corresponding to 29% of all acute myocardial infarction cases. The 30-day mortality rate was 6.6% for OMI, compared with 3.3% for non-OMI. Only 5.4% of the OMI cases received angiography within the guideline-recommended maximum of 90 minutes after ED arrival. The AI model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) of 95.3% (95% CI, 93.8%-97.3%), with a sensitivity of 62% compared with 27% for the STEMI criteria (difference 34.5%; 95% CI, 22.9%-45.2%) at the same specificity (97.4%). Conclusion: Our AI model identified OMI in ED patients with chest pain with an AUC of 95%, doubling sensitivity compared with the STEMI criteria at the same specificity. Using the model could reduce time to intervention, as only about 1 in 20 OMI cases currently receive timely angiography.
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.