Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41853636›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026

Artificial intelligence-derived electrocardiographic age gap as a predictor of mortality after coronary revascularization: prognostic value and short-term intra-patient variability.

Louise Vander Heyde, Karl Dujardin, Wim Anné, Maarten Vanhaverbeke, David McAuliffe, Nathalie Mertens, Peter De Jaeger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Louise Vander HeydeRADar Learning and Innovation Centre, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1154-293X
Karl DujardinDepartment of Cardiology, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.
Wim AnnéDepartment of Cardiology, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.
Maarten VanhaverbekeDepartment of Cardiology, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4385-7069
David McAuliffeResero Limited, Bannow Road 288, Dublin 7, Ireland.
Nathalie MertensRADar Learning and Innovation Centre, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2409-7586
Peter De JaegerRADar Learning and Innovation Centre, AZ Delta, Deltalaan 1, Roeselare 8800, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3398-6833

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: The artificial intelligence (AI)-derived electrocardiographic (ECG) age gap-the difference between AI-predicted ECG age and chronological age-is an emerging biomarker of biological ageing linked to mortality. This study assessed its prognostic value for short- and long-term mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), addressing model bias in ageing cohorts and short-term intra-patient variability. Methods and results: A residual neural network was trained on 532 301 retrospective ECGs and optimized with a distribution-aware loss function to reduce age-imbalance bias (mean absolute error 6.87 years, Conclusion: The AI-derived ECG age gap independently predicts mortality after revascularization, but substantial short-term variability necessitates serial monitoring for reliable clinical use.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCoronary artery bypass graftECG age gapElectrocardiogramPercutaneous coronary interventionRevascularization

Identifiers

PMID41853636
PMCPMC12994139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.