ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2025
Short-term atrial fibrillation onset prediction using machine learning.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Reactive to Proactive Healthcare: Synergizing Wearable Biomarkers and Machine Learning in Digital Therapeutics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Autonomic Nervous Dysfunction and Ultra-Short-Term Heart Rate Variability in Atrial Fibrillation: Recent Advances in Early Detection.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Prediction and Detection of Atrial Fibrillation from Sinus-Rhythm Electrocardiograms and Ambulatory Monitoring.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Short-Term Arrhythmia Prediction Using AI Based on Daily Data From Implantable Devices: Multicenter Prospective Observational Study.JMIR cardio · 2026Observational
- A two-stage deep learning framework for predicting the onset of Atrial fibrillation using RR interval-based embeddings.Biocybernetics and biomedical engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Integrating machine learning (ML) models into wearable or connected devices to deliver early warning alerts prior to atrial fibrillation (AF) onset may represent an effective preventive strategy. Machine learning algorithms applied to two-lead Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings can support the development of predictive models capable of detecting imminent paroxysmal AF episodes within short-term windows. This approach could facilitate a more targeted 'pill-in-the-pocket' (PITP)-like intervention strategy, potentially enhancing timely therapeutic actions and improving patient outcomes. Aim: This study aimed to identify patients currently in sinus rhythm who will experience an AF episode within the subsequent hours by analysing 24-h Holter ECG recordings with ML. Methods: We established a novel database comprising 95 871 manually analysed Holter ECG recordings, identifying 1319 episodes of paroxysmal AF from 872 patients. Among these, 835 AF episodes from 506 recordings had more than 60 min of normal sinus rhythm prior to AF onset and more than 10 min of sustained AF following onset. Patients were stratified into five age groups: all patients combined, under 60 years, 60-70 years, 70-80 years, and over 80 years. Additionally, 365 recordings from 347 patients without rhythm abnormalities were identified and classified, from which two ECG segments were selected. Two deep learning (DL) models were trained on raw ECG data to predict AF onset. To compare DL models with traditional ML approaches using heart rate variability (HRV) parameters, we employed a random forest classifier and a gradient-boosted decision tree model (XGBoost, XGB). Results: The decision trees models trained on HRV parameters delivered the best predictive performance. The most significant results were observed for episodes lasting more than 5 min of AF, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.919 (95% CI: 0.879-0.958) and an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.919 (95% CI: 0.879-0.958) for XGB. At a decision threshold of 0.5, accuracy was 84.5% (81.2-87.8), sensitivity was 83.0% (79.5-86.4), specificity was 86.6% (79.3-93.9), positive predictive value was 90.2% (85.5-94.9), negative predictive value was 78.4% (74.7-82.1), and the F1 score was 86.2% (83.5-89.0). Conclusion: These findings indicate that HRV parameters contain crucial information for the short-term prediction of AF onset, supporting preventive strategies. Integration of such predictive models into wearable mHealth technologies could facilitate a PITP-like preventive approach, potentially reducing AF-related morbidity. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these promising results further.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.