Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42787359›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026

Label-efficient cross-population transfer learning for electrocardiographic risk stratification: evaluation across German, Chinese and US cohorts.

Yan Wang, Yan Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular 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.

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

2 authors.

Yan Wang *Department of Functional Examination, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine, Lu'an, Anhui, China.
Yan Lu *Department of Functional Examinations, Hubei Third People's Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Electrocardiography (ECG) is the most widely deployed cardiac screening modality, but demographic, acquisition and label-space heterogeneity across cohorts obstructs clinical translation. Cross-population studies rarely quantify which conditions transfer, how much target labelling is needed, or whether the adapted score stays calibrated and clinically useful. Methods: We harmonised 12,521 recordings from PTB-XL (Germany; 7,371 records, 6,643 patients), Chapman-Ningbo (China; 4,574) and the MIT-BIH Arrhythmia Database (USA; 576 segments, 48 recordings) into 13 SNOMED-CT super-classes. A 38-dimensional interpretable feature set, computed in physical units and standardised on the source training partition alone, fed a compact multi-task backbone (30,400 parameters) trained on patient-separated partitions. It was evaluated zero-shot on both targets and adapted with 5%-50% of Chapman-Ningbo labels by linear probing on the frozen embedding, with partial and full fine-tuning as comparators; prevalence-aware sampling made four target classes (NORM, STD, LVH, TINV) evaluable. The composite diagnostic score was recalibrated on a dedicated split and assessed on untouched test data using bootstrap intervals, Holm-corrected comparisons and subgroup interaction tests. Results: The source backbone reached macro-AUROC 0.866 (0.837-0.891) across 13 classes. Zero-shot transfer recovered 88% of the four-class source reference on Chapman-Ningbo (0.754, 0.727-0.779) and 0.642 (0.546-0.735, record-clustered) on MIT-BIH. Linear probing reached 0.795 with 5% of target labels and 0.829 with 50%, below the four-class source reference of 0.859; after Holm correction the gain over zero-shot was significant for NORM (+0.135), STD (+0.093) and TINV (+0.065) but not LVH (+0.004). Full fine-tuning added 0.021 at 50% labels but was inferior at 5% and less well calibrated. The recalibrated composite score attained AUROC 0.791 (0.743-0.836), Brier score 0.055 and expected calibration error 0.018 on Chapman-Ningbo, where 97% of positives were left-ventricular hypertrophy, and 0.834 on the seven-condition PTB-XL composite. Discrimination varied across age strata (0.708-0.863; interaction Conclusion: Cross-population transfer of ECG models is feasible with label-efficient fine-tuning of a compact, interpretable feature backbone, and the resulting composite diagnostic score remains well-calibrated in a geographically distinct population. Subgroup heterogeneity nonetheless persists, with lower discrimination in participants aged 65 years and over and a sex-dependent calibration slope, and requires further validation.

Indexed as

calibrationcross-population generalisationdecision-curve analysisdomain adaptationelectrocardiographylinear probingsubgroup performancetransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID42787359
PMCPMC13601223

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.