ArticleNPJ systems biology and applications2026
AI-enhanced approaches for personalized cardiac treatment: insights from ECG data.
Article in NPJ systems biology and applications, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of drug-induced alterations in the electrocardiogram (ECG) is essential in measuring cardiac safety, but manual analysis is not always accurate enough to identify subtle but important effects. This paper examines how machine learning (ML) models can be used to categorize various pharmacological treatments according to their distinct ECG patterns to establish a platform of individualized therapeutic evaluation. Using the public ECG Effects of Dofetilide, Moxifloxacin, Dofetilide+Mexiletine, Dofetilide+Lidocaine and Moxifloxacin+Diltiazem (ECGDMMLD) database, key electrophysiological features were extracted-including heart rate variability (HRV) and standard cardiac intervals (RR, PR, QT, QRS) to train and compare three different classifiers: XGBoost, Random Forest, and a Support Vector Machine (SVM). The analysis showed that tree-based ensemble techniques were very useful in this task. The XGBoost model had a better classification accuracy of 98.1%, which was closely followed by the random forest at 97.3%. Conversely, the SVM had much lower accuracy, implying that it was not as well adapted to the complexity of the high-dimensional ECG data. These results establish that ML models, particularly XGBoost, can accurately decode complex drug-induced cardiac signatures from ECG data. This work is a powerful demonstration of the proof-of-concept of automated and data-driven analytics integration into clinical processes to enhance drug safety and promote personalized medicine.
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.