Cited by 79ECG Monitoring and AnalysisArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Clinical significance, challenges and limitations in using artificial intelligence for electrocardiography-based diagnosis

Open access
Chung, Cheuk To, Lee, Sharen, King, Emma, Liu, Tong, Armoundas, Antonis A., Bazoukis, George, Tse, Gary·2022·International Journal of Arrhythmia

Abstract

Cardiovascular diseases are one of the leading global causes of mortality. Currently, clinicians rely on their own analyses or automated analyses of the electrocardiogram (ECG) to obtain a diagnosis. However, both approaches can only include a finite number of predictors and are unable to execute complex analyses. Artificial intelligence (AI) has enabled the introduction of machine and deep learning algorithms to compensate for the existing limitations of current ECG analysis methods, with promising results. However, it should be prudent to recognize that these algorithms also associated with their own unique set of challenges and limitations, such as professional liability, systematic bias, surveillance, cybersecurity, as well as technical and logistical challenges. This review aims to increase familiarity with and awareness of AI algorithms used in ECG diagnosis, and to ultimately inform the interested stakeholders on their potential utility in addressing present clinical challenges.

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 · 10.1186/s42444-022-00075-x

Cites

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?

  • Bias in data presents a critical issue for ML-based PAS diagnosis, as ML algorithms trained on biased datasets may show disparities in performance across different population groups, leading to decreased diagnostic accuracy in specific demographic groups.

    “Bias in data also presents a critical issue, as ML algorithms that have been trained on biased datasets may show disparities in performance across different population groups, leading to decreased diagnostic accuracy in specific demographic groups [40].”

    From Machine Learning in Maternity: Early Diagnosis of Placenta Accreta Spectrum (2026) · cites this paper as [40]

    The Systemic bias section says biased data can affect AI-ECG algorithms and reports lower diagnostic accuracy in populations with lower disease prevalence. It supports the general concern about unequal performance across groups, but discusses ECG-based detection of aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation, not PAS diagnosis. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 63 · Cited by 79

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [40]Au-Yeung WM, Sevakula RK, Sahani AK, Kassab M, Boyer R, Isselbacher EM, Real-time machine learning-based intensive care unit alarm classification without prior knowledge of the underlying rhythm. Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2021; 2(3): 437– 45. 34604758 PMC8482048
  2. [49]Bazoukis G, Hall J, Loscalzo J, The augmented intelligence in medicine: a framework for successful implementation. Cell Rep Med (in press). PMC8784713 35106506
  3. [51]Griffin F Artificial Intelligence and liability in health care. Health Matrix. 2021; 31: 65.
  4. [52]Barocas S, Selbst AD. Big data’s disparate impact. California Law Rev. 2016; 104: 671.

Authors
Chung, C. T., Lee, S., King, E., Liu, T., Armoundas, A. A., Bazoukis, G., & Tse, G.
Affiliations
  • Cardiac Electrophysiology Unit, Cardiovascular Analytics Group, Hong Kong, China.
  • Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University (CN)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • University of Nicosia (CY)
Corresponding author
  • Bazoukis, George
  • Tse, Gary
Venue
International Journal of Arrhythmia
Publisher
XMLink
Published
2022
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
24-24
ISSN
  • 2466-0981 (ISSN-L)
  • 2466-1171
OpenAlex
W4298119164
Cited by
79
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 12
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Arrhythmia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • American Heart Association (17UNPG33840017)
  • RICBAC Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (HL135335-01, 1 R21 HL137870-01, 1 R21EB026164-01, 3R21EB026164-02S1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
artificial intelligence, electrocardiogram, electrocardiographic diagnosis, deep learning, machine learning, cardiovascular disease, algorithmic bias, professional liability, cybersecurity, clinical implementation barriers

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