ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2026
Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Electrocardiography for Prediction of Sudden Cardiac Death and Malignant Ventricular Arrhythmias: A Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background and Objectives: Current risk stratification strategies for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) have limited sensitivity and specificity. Artificial intelligence (AI) applied to electrocardiograms (ECGs) has emerged as a promising tool to predict the risk of future cardiac arrhythmias. This scoping review synthesizes evidence from original studies evaluating AI models trained on ECGs for risk stratification of SCD/malignant ventricular arrhythmias. (2) Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and IEEE Xplore was conducted to identify peer-reviewed studies from inception to February 2026. Eligible studies included original investigations in which the model input was an ECG, recorded at baseline or during monitoring, and the outcome was either short-term or long-term SCD/malignant ventricular arrhythmia risk prediction. Extracted variables included study characteristics, ECG data, AI model data, model performance metrics, and the validation strategy. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. (3) Results: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. High-risk cardiovascular subgroups (e.g., heart failure cohort, ICD cohort, etc.) or datasets from admitted patients, and conventional machine learning models or deep learning models were used in most studies. AI-ECG algorithms achieved moderate-to-high discriminative performance for identifying patients at an increased risk for imminent SCD/malignant ventricular arrhythmias (nine studies, AUROC ≈ 0.77-0.96) or future SCD/malignant ventricular arrhythmias (eleven studies, AUROC ≈ 0.66-0.94). However, multiple methodological limitations were identified, including limited sample sizes, susceptibility to overfitting, data imbalance-related bias, heterogeneity in dataset and endpoint definitions, inadequate external validation, and incomplete assessment and reporting of model calibration. (4) Conclusions: AI-ECG models demonstrate potential for risk stratification of SCD and malignant ventricular arrhythmias. However, the current evidence base is constrained by several methodological limitations, and further research is required to determine the clinical utility of AI-ECG for predicting SCD.
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.