ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Personalized artificial intelligence based left ventricular ejection fraction and systolic dysfunction assessment.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence-Based Electrocardiography for the Detection of Heart Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left-ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) is a fundamental measure of cardiac function, typically assessed with resource-intensive imaging techniques, such as transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We evaluated the electrocardiogram (ECG) as an alternative, easily accessible data to estimate LVEF in a large cohort of 191,941 patients, comprising 236,623 ECG/TTE pairs. Using either the ECG data alone or with structured features, we developed convolutional and probabilistic neural network models to estimate LVEF and quantify its uncertainty. The ECG-only model achieved a mean-absolute-error (MAE) of 7.71% and a root-mean-square-error (RMSE) of 10.36%, while the hybrid model achieved an MAE of 7.84% and an RMSE of 10.52%. Personalized models significantly improved performance, achieving MAEs of 5.98% (ECG-only) and 6.75% (hybrid). LV systolic dysfunction (LVEF ≤ 40%) was identified with an AUC of 0.88, sensitivity of 0.92 and negative predictive value of 0.98. The presented models demonstrated excellent performance in estimating LVEF and screening of LV systolic dysfunction.
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.