ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
Establishment and validation of an electrocardiogram vector-based machine learning model for the conversion of prone position electrocardiograms into standard electrocardiograms.
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.
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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The prone electrocardiogram (ECG) presents challenges in detecting anterior ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI). This study aims to develop a method to convert prone ECGs to standard ECGs to facilitate physician diagnosis of STEMI and other cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Methods and results: The standard ECGs, vectorcardiograms (VCGs), and prone ECGs were prospectively examined for model development. Three conversion approaches were developed: direct lead matching by linear regression (Approach 1), conversion from prone ECGs to VCGs via regression and then to standard ECGs (Approach 2), and machine-learning (ML)-based models (Approach 3). External validation was done with a separate cohort, and a hybrid model was created by integrating the best-performing morphology and amplitude models. The diagnostic performance of the converted ECGs was reviewed by nine cardiologists and benchmarked against the original ECG interpretations. Five hundred and ninety prone ECG cardiac cycles from seventy participants [median age 64 years, interquartile range (IQR) 27.0-70.0] were analysed for model development. The external validation cohort had 94 patients (median age 56.5 years, IQR 39.3-67.0). Approach 3 had the best morphology accuracy, and Approach 2 had the best amplitude similarity. These two models were combined into a hybrid model. In the external validation dataset, the AUCs (95% confidence intervals) for detecting normal ECGs, anterior ST-segment elevation/depression, old anterior myocardial infarction, and bundle branch blocks were 0.835 (0.734-0.908), 0.825 (0.693-0.923), 0.898 (0.799-0.957), 0.867 (0.622-0.956), and 0.910 (0.714-0.953), respectively. Conclusion: The successful development of models for converting prone ECGs to standard ECGs demonstrated good and robust diagnostic performance for CVD.
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.