ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence for Arrhythmia Detection Using the 12-Lead Electrocardiogram: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool for interpreting 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs), with the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy for arrhythmia detection. However, published studies vary widely in methodology and validation strategy, warranting a quantitative synthesis of diagnostic performance. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA-DTA 2018 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251027264). Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library through September 2025 without language restrictions. Studies evaluating AI algorithms for arrhythmia detection using 12-lead ECGs were included. Data on sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were extracted. Pooled estimates were generated using a bivariate random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2, and the certainty of evidence was quantified using GRADE. Results: 20 studies were included in the meta-analysis, encompassing over 5.5 million ECGs. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for AI-based arrhythmia detection were 94.0% (95% CI 90.8-96.2; I Conclusions: AI models applied to 12-lead ECGs demonstrate excellent diagnostic performance for arrhythmia detection. Findings support potential integration into clinical workflows, particularly in settings with limited cardiology expertise. Given substantial heterogeneity, standardized datasets and multicenter prospective validation are essential to ensure effective and equitable implementation.
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.