ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
An artificial intelligence model for electrocardiogram detection of occlusion myocardial infarction: a retrospective study to reduce false-positive cath lab activations.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 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.
- Pathways of Care for Patients Who Undergo Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for STEMI: A Review of "Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Machine learning for prediction of newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation after emergency percutaneous coronary intervention during hospitalization in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a multi-center prospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Existing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) alert pathways that rely on traditional STEMI criteria perform suboptimally. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model to detect acute occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) from the routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and, specifically, its potential to reduce false-positive activations. Methods and results: Consecutive adults managed via the STEMI pathway were included from a tertiary academic medical centre between January 2022 and December 2023. Cases without an available ECG for review, death prior to catheterization, or alternative reasons for activation (i.e. electrical instability or urgent interventions) were excluded. Pre-coronary angiography tracings were interpreted via the AI tool. Test characteristics were compared against traditional STEMI criteria. The primary outcome was the number of avoidable false-positive activations. During the 2-year study period, there were 454 activations, 150 were excluded, and 304 cases with unique ECGs were included in the study cohort. There were 118 (38.8%) false-positive activations, of which 86 (72.9%) were correctly predicted by the AI model. Its test characteristics for identifying true positives were superior compared with traditional STEMI criteria for a sensitivity of 89.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 84.0-92.9] vs. 68.3% (95% CI: 61.3-74.5), specificity 72.9% (95% CI: 64.2-80.1) vs. 51.7% (95% CI: 42.8-60.5), and accuracy 82.9% (95% CI: 78.3-86.7) vs. 61.8 (95% CI: 56.3-67.1). Conclusion: The AI model is superior to traditional STEMI criteria for detecting OMI and has the potential to reduce false-positive catheterization lab activations. It can be a useful decision-aid for catheterization lab activation.
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.