Atrial fibrillation detection in outpatient electrocardiogram monitoring: An algorithmic crowdsourcing approach.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
26
07
2021
accepted:
28
10
2021
entrez:
16
11
2021
pubmed:
17
11
2021
medline:
31
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Atrial fibrillation (AFib) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with stroke, blood clots, heart failure, coronary artery disease, and/or death. Multiple methods have been proposed for AFib detection, with varying performances, but no single approach appears to be optimal. We hypothesized that each state-of-the-art algorithm is appropriate for different subsets of patients and provides some independent information. Therefore, a set of suitably chosen algorithms, combined in a weighted voting framework, will provide a superior performance to any single algorithm. We investigate and modify 38 state-of-the-art AFib classification algorithms for a single-lead ambulatory electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring device. All algorithms are ranked using a random forest classifier and an expert-labeled training dataset of 2,532 recordings. The seven top-ranked algorithms are combined by using an optimized weighting approach. The proposed fusion algorithm, when validated on a separate test dataset consisting of 4,644 recordings, resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.99. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive-value (PPV), negative-predictive-value (NPV), and F1-score of the proposed algorithm were 0.93, 0.97, 0.87, 0.99, and 0.90, respectively, which were all superior to any single algorithm or any previously published. This study demonstrates how a set of well-chosen independent algorithms and a voting mechanism to fuse the outputs of the algorithms, outperforms any single state-of-the-art algorithm for AFib detection. The proposed framework is a case study for the general notion of crowdsourcing between open-source algorithms in healthcare applications. The extension of this framework to similar applications may significantly save time, effort, and resources, by combining readily existing algorithms. It is also a step toward the democratization of artificial intelligence and its application in healthcare.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AFib) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with stroke, blood clots, heart failure, coronary artery disease, and/or death. Multiple methods have been proposed for AFib detection, with varying performances, but no single approach appears to be optimal. We hypothesized that each state-of-the-art algorithm is appropriate for different subsets of patients and provides some independent information. Therefore, a set of suitably chosen algorithms, combined in a weighted voting framework, will provide a superior performance to any single algorithm.
METHODS
We investigate and modify 38 state-of-the-art AFib classification algorithms for a single-lead ambulatory electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring device. All algorithms are ranked using a random forest classifier and an expert-labeled training dataset of 2,532 recordings. The seven top-ranked algorithms are combined by using an optimized weighting approach.
RESULTS
The proposed fusion algorithm, when validated on a separate test dataset consisting of 4,644 recordings, resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.99. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive-value (PPV), negative-predictive-value (NPV), and F1-score of the proposed algorithm were 0.93, 0.97, 0.87, 0.99, and 0.90, respectively, which were all superior to any single algorithm or any previously published.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrates how a set of well-chosen independent algorithms and a voting mechanism to fuse the outputs of the algorithms, outperforms any single state-of-the-art algorithm for AFib detection. The proposed framework is a case study for the general notion of crowdsourcing between open-source algorithms in healthcare applications. The extension of this framework to similar applications may significantly save time, effort, and resources, by combining readily existing algorithms. It is also a step toward the democratization of artificial intelligence and its application in healthcare.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34784378
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259916
pii: PONE-D-21-24274
pmc: PMC8594842
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0259916Subventions
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB030362
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002378
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: D.A. is the Founder & Chief Medical Officer of AliveCor Inc. C.G, D.T., and J.X. are employees of AliveCor. G.C. is an advisor to AliveCor and holds significant stock. A.B.R., Q.L., and R.S. have no conflicts of interest. AliveCor provides unrestricted funds to Emory’s Department of Biomedical Informatics. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
Physiol Meas. 2018 Sep 24;39(9):094005
pubmed: 30102603
Physiol Meas. 2018 Jun 27;39(6):065008
pubmed: 29808824
Nature. 2015 May 28;521(7553):436-44
pubmed: 26017442
Physiol Meas. 2018 Jun 25;39(6):064004
pubmed: 29794340
Physiol Meas. 2018 Jun 20;39(6):064003
pubmed: 29791322
Physiol Meas. 2018 Sep 13;39(9):094002
pubmed: 30102251
Physiol Meas. 2018 Oct 30;39(11):114001
pubmed: 30211688
J Cheminform. 2014 Mar 29;6(1):10
pubmed: 24678909
Eur Heart J. 2010 Oct;31(19):2369-429
pubmed: 20802247
Int J Stroke. 2021 Feb;16(2):217-221
pubmed: 31955707
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 12;13(4):e0195088
pubmed: 29649277
Comput Cardiol (2010). 2017 Sep;44:
pubmed: 29862307
Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Jun 16;6:213-20
pubmed: 24966695
Ann Biomed Eng. 2015 Dec;43(12):2892-902
pubmed: 26036335
Physiol Meas. 2018 Sep 27;39(9):094007
pubmed: 30187892
Circulation. 2000 Jun 13;101(23):E215-20
pubmed: 10851218
Physiol Meas. 2019 Jun 04;40(5):054006
pubmed: 30650387
Ann Biomed Eng. 2014 Apr;42(4):871-84
pubmed: 24368593