Cited by 566ECG Monitoring and AnalysisNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes

Passive Detection of Atrial Fibrillation Using a Commercially Available Smartwatch

Open access
Tison, Geoffrey H., Sanchez, José M., Ballinger, Brandon, Singh, Avesh, Olgin, Jeffrey E., Pletcher, Mark J., Vittinghoff, Eric, Lee, Emily S. +6 more·2018·JAMA Cardiology

Abstract

Importance: Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects 34 million people worldwide and is a leading cause of stroke. A readily accessible means to continuously monitor for AF could prevent large numbers of strokes and death. Objective: To develop and validate a deep neural network to detect AF using smartwatch data. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multinational cardiovascular remote cohort study coordinated at the University of California, San Francisco, smartwatches were used to obtain heart rate and step count data for algorithm development. A total of 9750 participants enrolled in the Health eHeart Study and 51 patients undergoing cardioversion at the University of California, San Francisco, were enrolled between February 2016 and March 2017. A deep neural network was trained using a method called heuristic pretraining in which the network approximated representations of the R-R interval (ie, time between heartbeats) without manual labeling of training data. Validation was performed against the reference standard 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG) in a separate cohort of patients undergoing cardioversion. A second exploratory validation was performed using smartwatch data from ambulatory individuals against the reference standard of self-reported history of persistent AF. Data were analyzed from March 2017 to September 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic C statistic for the algorithm to detect AF were generated based on the reference standard of 12-lead ECG-diagnosed AF. Results: Of the 9750 participants enrolled in the remote cohort, including 347 participants with AF, 6143 (63.0%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 42 (12) years. There were more than 139 million heart rate measurements on which the deep neural network was trained. The deep neural network exhibited a C statistic of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P < .001) to detect AF against the reference standard 12-lead ECG-diagnosed AF in the external validation cohort of 51 patients undergoing cardioversion; sensitivity was 98.0% and specificity was 90.2%. In an exploratory analysis relying on self-report of persistent AF in ambulatory participants, the C statistic was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.78); sensitivity was 67.7% and specificity was 67.6%. Conclusions and Relevance: This proof-of-concept study found that smartwatch photoplethysmography coupled with a deep neural network can passively detect AF but with some loss of sensitivity and specificity against a criterion-standard ECG. Further studies will help identify the optimal role for smartwatch-guided rhythm assessment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.0136

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nasir JM, Pomeroy W, Marler A, et al. Predicting determinants of atrial fibrillation or flutter for therapy elucidation in patients at risk for thromboembolic events (PREDATE AF) study. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14(7):955-961.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tison, G. H., Sanchez, J. M., Ballinger, B., Singh, A., Olgin, J. E., Pletcher, M. J., Vittinghoff, E., Lee, E. S., Fan, S. M., Gladstone, R. A., Mikell, C., Sohoni, N., Hsieh, J., & Marcus, G. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
  • Cardiogram Incorporated, San Francisco, California
Corresponding author
Marcus, Gregory M.
Venue
JAMA Cardiology
Published
2018-05-01
Volume
3
Issue
5
Pages
409
ISSN
2380-6583 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2790444357
Cited by
566
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 60 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 22
FWCI
44.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, passive detection, smartwatches, wearable devices, deep neural network, heart rate, RR interval, cardioversion, 12-lead ECG, stroke prevention, remote monitoring, step count, algorithm validation, sensitivity and specificity, concordance index
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Atrial Fibrillation, Electric Countershock, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Reproducibility of Results, Photoplethysmography, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review