ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Performance of the 12-lead ECG in predicting short- and long-term risk of sudden cardiac death.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We evaluated the performance of 12-channel ECG in predicting sudden cardiac death across different time intervals using a retrospective data set of 17,625 high-risk cardiac patients who underwent coronary angiography (2007-2018) with follow-up data until 2022. Extreme gradient boosting using 12SL Marquette software-derived parameters from digital ECG recording was used to train and validate models using a random 80/20 split. Model performance was evaluated in both unbalanced and risk-factor-balanced case-control sets. Using single ECG, both long-term (from baseline ECG) and short-term predictions (from the last recorded ECG) achieved a modest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 in the unbalanced validation and 0.59/0.63 in the balanced validation (long-/short-term). Adding clinical risk factor data resulted in AUC 0.70/0.71 (unbalanced) and 0.64/0.62 (balanced) for long- and short-term prediction. Adding data of observed ECG changes during follow-up for short-term prediction resulted in the best model performance (0.72/0.66; unbalanced/balanced).
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.