ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
PASTEC: an open clinical infrastructure for data aggregation and prospective validation of AI in cardiac remote monitoring.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices generates large volumes of data that must be reviewed using vendor-specific platforms, creating a growing clinical workload. Although artificial intelligence (AI) could alleviate this burden, the absence of infrastructures enabling prospective data aggregation and evaluation within routine workflows limits clinical translation. We developed PASTEC, an open platform integrated into existing RM systems via a browser extension, enabling client-side pseudonymization, annotation, and centralized academic data storage. Platform usability was prospectively evaluated during one week of routine activity in a high-volume RM center and compared with a week of standard RM review. A total of 1276 recordings were reviewed, including 697 with structured annotation. Median processing time per recording was 5.31 s with annotation versus 2.88 s without annotation (p < 0.01), corresponding to a limited additional workload compatible with routine clinical activity. No identifiable patient information was detected in reviewed pseudonymized data. PASTEC provides a scalable infrastructure addressing a key bottleneck in the prospective clinical validation of AI for cardiac remote monitoring.
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.