ArticleScientific reports2026
Risk stratification of patients with syncope in the emergency department using ECG based artificial intelligence models.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Syncope is a common presentation in the emergency department, yet risk stratification for adverse events remains a substantial clinical challenge. In this study, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) models for identification of patients at high risk of 1-year cardiovascular death was investigated. The study included 39,735 patients aged 18 years or older who presented to a Danish emergency department with a discharge diagnosis of syncope and had an electrocardiogram recorded on the same day. Using multiple electrocardiogram parameters four different models were developed - artificial neural network, logistic regression, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting. Additionally, the models’ ability to stratify patients into low- and high-risk groups of 1-year cardiovascular death was assessed. The mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curves was 0.85 (0.01), while the mean area under the precision-recall curve was 0.11 (0.01). Stratification into low- and high-risk groups showed hazard ratios ranging from 10.80 (95% CI, 8.55–13.63) to 17.97 (95% CI, 12.32–26.20) in univariate Cox Proportional Hazards regression analysis across the four models. These findings demonstrate that AI-based models can successfully distinguish high-risk from low-risk patients with syncope, allowing for targeted evaluation and efficient clinical decision making.
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.