ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2026
Improved Detection of Acute Coronary Occlusion Myocardial Infarction by an Artificial Intelligence Electrocardiogram Model in Swedish Emergency Departments.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The Queen of Hearts (QoH) ECG artificial intelligence model has demonstrated improved sensitivity for detecting occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI) compared with STEMI criteria, but further validation is needed. We aimed to evaluate QoH's diagnostic performance in patients with chest pain at Swedish emergency departments (EDs). Methods: This retrospective analysis included consecutive patients with chest pain at the ED from the ESC-TROP study (2017-2018). Patients transferred directly from the prehospital setting to the coronary care unit were not included. OMI classification was based on angiographic data and expert adjudication. QoH, conventional STEMI criteria, and the Glasgow ECG Analysis Algorithm were applied to all cases. In addition, extended STEMI criteria incorporating additional ECG leads (-V1, -V2, -V3, -aVL, -aVR, and -III) and OMI criteria for left bundle branch block (modified Sgarbossa criteria) and left ventricular hypertrophy (ST elevation V1-V3 ≥0.25 of R and S) were applied. Results: Among 24,511 patients (mean age 59 ± 19 years, 52% male), 467 (1.9%) had OMI. QoH achieved higher sensitivity than STEMI criteria (52% [47 to 57] vs 23% [19 to 27]), similar specificity (99% [99 to 99] vs 98% [98 to 98]), higher positive predictive value (51% [47 to 54] vs 17% [15 to 20]), and similar negative predictive value (99% [99 to 99] vs 98 [98 to 99]). The Glasgow algorithm obtained 32% (28 to 37) sensitivity, 98% (98 to 98) specificity, 26% (23 to 30) PPV, and 99% (99 to 99) NPV, and corresponding number for the extended criteria were 41% (36 to 45), 95% (95 to 96), 14% (12 to 15), and 99% (99 to 99). Conclusion: In ED patients with chest pain, QoH improved sensitivity in OMI detection compared with currently available ECG criteria, with similar specificity.
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.