ArticleHeart rhythm O22026
Atrial fibrillation detection performance of an insertable cardiac monitor: Results from an Assert-IQ post-market clinical study and a novel artificial intelligence algorithm.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2026. 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.
- Artificial intelligence for atrial fibrillation episode classification: Concerns about interpretation and validation.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Author's Reply to "Artificial intelligence for atrial fibrillation episode classification: Concerns about interpretation and validation".Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Atrial Fibrillation Burden: Assessment, Clinical Significance, and Therapeutic Implications.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Multi-Center Trained Residual Neural Network for Robust Classification of Atrial High-Rate Episodes in Remotely Monitored Pacemakers and Defibrillators.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate atrial fibrillation (AF) detection and burden assessment are critical features of modern insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs), enabling precise determination of AF episode patterns, frequency, duration, and total burden to guide treatments. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the AF detection performance of the Assert-IQ ICM and assess the impact of an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm designed for reducing false-positive AF episodes. Methods: This prospective, single-arm, multicenter study enrolled 151 subjects with symptomatic, drug-refractory paroxysmal or persistent AF. A Holter assessment was conducted after ICM insertion. AF detection metrics-sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value-were evaluated by comparing ICM detections with core laboratory-annotated Holter AF events. The impact of an AI algorithm on AF detection performance was then assessed. Results: Among 135 analyzable patients, 39 had Holter-confirmed AF with 522 episodes lasting ≥2 minutes. Assert-IQ ICM correctly identified all patients with true AF. Duration-based sensitivity, specificity, PPV, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 93.0%, 99.3%, 97.4%, 98.0%, and 97.9%, respectively. Episode detection sensitivity was 99.4% (gross) and 99.9% (patient average). AF burden correlation between ICM and Holter was excellent (r = 0.99). The AI algorithm retained all true positives and reduced 72.6% of false positives, improving PPV from 79.9% to 93.6%. Conclusion: Assert-IQ ICM accurately detects AF and quantifies burden for long-term monitoring. The AI algorithm effectively reduces false positives while maintaining high sensitivity.
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.