Cited by 1,613ECG Monitoring and AnalysisAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

An artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm for the identification of patients with atrial fibrillation during sinus rhythm: a retrospective analysis of outcome prediction

Attia, Zachi I, Noseworthy, Peter A, Lopez-Jimenez, Francisco, Asirvatham, Samuel J, Deshmukh, Abhishek J, Gersh, Bernard J, Carter, Rickey E, Yao, Xiaoxi +4 more·2019·The Lancet

Abstract

Background Atrial fibrillation is frequently asymptomatic and thus underdetected but is associated with stroke, heart failure, and death. Existing screening methods require prolonged monitoring and are limited by cost and low yield. We aimed to develop a rapid, inexpensive, point-of-care means of identifying patients with atrial fibrillation using machine learning. Methods We developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled electrocardiograph (ECG) using a convolutional neural network to detect the electrocardiographic signature of atrial fibrillation present during normal sinus rhythm using standard 10-second, 12-lead ECGs. We included all patients aged 18 years or older with at least one digital, normal sinus rhythm, standard 10-second, 12-lead ECG acquired in the supine position at the Mayo Clinic ECG laboratory between Dec 31, 1993, and July 21, 2017, with rhythm labels validated by trained personnel under cardiologist supervision. We classified patients with at least one ECG with a rhythm of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as positive for atrial fibrillation. We allocated ECGs to the training, internal validation, and testing datasets in a 7:1:2 ratio. We calculated the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operatoring characteristic curve for the internal validation dataset to select a probability threshold, which we applied to the testing dataset. We evaluated model performance on the testing dataset by calculating the AUC and the accuracy, sensitivity, spe…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31721-0

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Increasing AI specificity reduces unnecessary referrals and associated costs but may compromise detection capability.

    “Improving AI’s sensitivity finds more high-risk patients but may raise medical costs while increasing specificity reduces unnecessary referrals but may weaken detection capability.”
  • Increasing AI sensitivity increases detection of high-risk patients but may raise medical costs.

    “Improving AI’s sensitivity finds more high-risk patients but may raise medical costs while increasing specificity reduces unnecessary referrals but may weaken detection capability.”
  • The ECG may contain latent signatures of atrial remodeling or electrophysiologic vulnerability even when AF is not present on the tracing.

    “However, Attia et al. demonstrated that an AI-enabled algorithm could identify AF-associated patterns from standard 12-lead ECGs recorded during sinus rhythm, suggesting that the ECG may contain latent signatures of atrial remodeling or electrophysiologic vulnerability even when AF is not present on the tracing itself [12].”
  • An AI-enabled algorithm could identify AF-associated patterns from standard 12-lead ECGs recorded during sinus rhythm.

    “However, Attia et al. demonstrated that an AI-enabled algorithm could identify AF-associated patterns from standard 12-lead ECGs recorded during sinus rhythm, suggesting that the ECG may contain latent signatures of atrial remodeling or electrophysiologic vulnerability even when AF is not present on the tracing itself [12].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Attia, Z. I., Noseworthy, P. A., Lopez-Jimenez, F., Asirvatham, S. J., Deshmukh, A. J., Gersh, B. J., Carter, R. E., Yao, X., Rabinstein, A. A., Erickson, B. J., Kapa, S., & Friedman, P. A.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Friedman, Paul A
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
394
Issue
10201
Pages
861-867
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2965520043
Cited by
1,613
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 267 · 2025: 311 · 2024: 264 · 2023: 224 · 2022: 190 · 2021: 198 · 2020: 141 · 2019: 15
FWCI
88.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Mayo Clinic
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, sinus rhythm, convolutional neural networks, artificial intelligence, atrial flutter, point-of-care screening, asymptomatic atrial fibrillation, stroke risk, heart failure risk, mortality risk, outcome prediction, risk stratification, digital ECG, 12-lead ECG, machine learning classification
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Atrial Fibrillation, Atrial Flutter, Electrocardiography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Retrospective Studies, ROC Curve, Case-Control Studies, Neural Networks, Computer

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