ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Automated interpretation of fetal cardiac function evaluation from the echocardiogram.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prenatal assessment of fetal cardiac function is crucial for predicting neonatal outcomes, yet manual echocardiographic measurements are labor-intensive and subjective. We developed a fully automated artificial intelligence (AI) workflow for estimating fetal cardiac function parameters from echocardiograms. The workflow integrates a deep learning model for real-time detection and segmentation of cardiac structures, followed by quality control and geometric calculation. It was developed and validated using an internal dataset of 52,942 annotated images from 1940 normal fetal echocardiograms, with further testing on two external normal datasets (245 echocardiograms) and one internal abnormal dataset (83 echocardiograms). Performance was compared against manual and Fetal Heart Quantification (Fetal HQ) measurements, and a dynamic Z-score model referencing gestational age and fetal biometrics was established. The AI achieved accurate segmentation, with mean Dice similarity coefficients >92% and mean intersection-over-union >85% across all test datasets. It exhibited higher intraclass correction coefficients and R-values relative to experts than inter-observer variability, alongside smaller mean absolute error and limits of agreement. The mean individual equivalence coefficients of all cardiac function parameters were below zero, indicating lower variability than manual or Fetal HQ. These results demonstrate that our fully automated AI workflow enables accurate, efficient, and reproducible quantification of fetal cardiac function, supporting its potential for standardized clinical application.
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.