ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Data distribution impacts the performance and generalisability of contrastive learning-based foundation models of electrocardiograms.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contrastive learning is a widely adopted self-supervised pretraining strategy, yet its dependence on cohort composition remains underexplored. We present Contrasting by Augmented Patient Electrocardiograms (CAPE) foundation model and pretrain on four cohorts (n = 5,203,269), from diverse populations across three continents (North America, South America, Asia). We systematically assess how cohort demographics, health status, and population diversity influence the downstream performance for prediction tasks also including two additional cohorts from another continent (Europe). We find that downstream performance depends on the distributional properties of the pretraining cohort, including demographics and health status. Moreover, while pretraining with a multi-centre, demographically diverse cohort improves in-distribution accuracy, it reduces out-of-distribution (OOD) generalisation of our contrastive approach by encoding cohort-specific artifacts. To address this, we propose the In-Distribution Batch (IDB) strategy, which preserves intra-cohort consistency during pretraining, discourages learning of spurious cohort-specific features, and instead promotes clinically meaningful variability within cohorts. This leads to improved out-of-distribution robustness, with gains of 9-40% in downstream label prediction performance. This work provides insights into pretraining strategies for more clinically deployable and generalisable foundation models.
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.