Cited by 77Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes

Mobile health applications for the detection of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review

Open access
Lopez Perales, Carlos Ruben, Van Spall, Harriette G C, Maeda, Shingo, Jimenez, Alejandro, Laţcu, Decebal Gabriel, Milman, Anat, Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, Fati, Mamas, Mamas A +2 more·2021·EP Europace

Abstract

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia and an important risk factor for stroke and heart failure. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the literature and summarize the performance of mobile health (mHealth) devices in diagnosing and screening for AF. Methods and results: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Forty-three studies met the inclusion criteria and were divided into two groups: 28 studies aimed at validating smart devices for AF diagnosis, and 15 studies used smart devices to screen for AF. Evaluated technologies included smartphones, with photoplethysmographic (PPG) pulse waveform measurement or accelerometer sensors, smartbands, external electrodes that can provide a smartphone single-lead electrocardiogram (iECG), such as AliveCor, Zenicor and MyDiagnostick, and earlobe monitor. The accuracy of these devices depended on the technology and the population, AliveCor and smartphone PPG sensors being the most frequent systems analysed. The iECG provided by AliveCor demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity between 66.7% and 98.5% and 99.4% and 99.0%, respectively. The PPG sensors detected AF with a sensitivity of 85.0–100% and a specificity of 93.5–99.0%. The incidence of newly diagnosed arrhythmia ranged from 0.12% in a healthy population to 8% among hospitalized patients. Conclusion: Although the evidence for clinical effectiveness is limited, these devices may be useful in detecting AF. While mHealth is growing in popularity, its clinical, economic, and policy implications merit further investigation. More head-to-head comparisons between mHealth and medical devices are needed to establish their comparative effectiveness.

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 · 10.1093/europace/euaa139

Cites

73 of 73 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. Quer G, Nima N, Shraddha L, Reinier , Steinhubl SR. Preliminary evaluation of a wrist wearable heart rate sensor for the detection of undiagnosed atrial fibrilla- tion in a realworld setting. Circulation 2018;136:A18610.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lopez Perales, C. R., Van Spall, H. G. C., Maeda, S., Jimenez, A., Laţcu, D. G., Milman, A., Kirakoya-Samadoulougou, F., Mamas, M. A., Muser, D., & Casado Arroyo, R.
Affiliations
  • Department of Cardiology, Hopital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Route de Lennik 808, 1070 Brussels, Belgium
  • Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, Canada
  • Tokyo Medical and Dental University (JP)
  • Division of Cardiology, University of Maryland Medical Center, 22 S. Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
  • Department of Cardiology, Centre Hospitalier Princesse Grace, Avenue Pasteur, 98000, Monaco, Monaco (Principalty)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Centre de Recherche en Epidémiologie, Biostatistiques et Recherche Clinique, Ecole de Santé Publique, Université librede Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 50 - 1050, Brussels, Belgium
  • Royal Stoke University Hospital (GB)
  • Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
EP Europace
Published
2020-10-12
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
11-28
ISSN
  • 1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2092
OpenAlex
W3092170269
Cited by
77
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 9
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Hamilton Health Sciences Career
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, mobile health, photoplethysmography, acceleration sensors, smart band, AliveCor, arrhythmia screening, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Atrial Fibrillation, Electrocardiography, Humans, Telemedicine, 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