Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42205132›Full record

ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2026

Deep Learning-Based Electrocardiogram Analysis for Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chen-Shu Wu, Chia-Hsin Liu, Gen-Min Lin, Yen-Lien Chou, Chiao-Chin Lee, Chin-Sheng Lin, Po-Huang Chen, Pang-Yen Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Chen-Shu WuDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine.
Chia-Hsin LiuDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei.
Gen-Min LinDepartment of Medicine, Hualien Armed Forces General Hospital, Hualien City.
Yen-Lien ChouDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine.
Chiao-Chin LeeDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine.
Chin-Sheng LinDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine.
Po-Huang ChenDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan.
Pang-Yen LiuDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the diagnostic gold standard for confirming pulmonary embolism (PE), it has limitations such as the risks associated with contrast media and logistical delays. Electrocardiography (ECG) is a widely accessible and safe alternative; however, it also has a low diagnostic sensitivity. Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based deep learning models using ECG data for PE detection and identify their strengths, limitations, and future directions. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched to identify studies evaluating AI models using ECG for PE detection. Studies were included if CTPA was used as the reference standard. Results: Five studies involving 467,017 patients were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the AI-based ECG models for PE detection were 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 68-72%) and 67% (95% CI: 66-67%), respectively. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 3.68 (95% CI: 3.31-4.09), and the summary receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded an area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.754, indicating moderate diagnostic accuracy. Significant heterogeneity was observed across the studies (I Conclusions: Current AI-based deep learning models for ECG analysis have moderate accuracy in detecting acute PE, with promising potential for clinical screening. However, the significant heterogeneity and limited external validation highlight the need for standardized methodologies and larger multicenter studies.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDeep learningDiagnostic accuracyElectrocardiogramMeta-analysisPulmonary embolism

Identifiers

PMID42205132
PMCPMC13202347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.