DeepRhythmAI

Artificial Intelligence for Direct-to-Physician Reporting of Ambulatory Electrocardiography

Doente / População Intervenção / Exposição Comparação Desfecho

In 14,606 ambulatory ECG recordings (mean duration 14 days) annotated beat by beat, the DeepRhythmAI ensemble model improved sensitivity for critical arrhythmias against cardiologist consensus panels compared with certified ECG technicians.

N
14 606
Desenho
Non-randomised diagnostic-accuracy comparison against 17 cardiologist consensus panels
Desfecho
Sensitivity for critical arrhythmias versus cardiologist consensus-panel annotation
Relevância
3
ResultadoSensitivity for critical arrhythmias 98.6% (95% CI 97.7–99.4) vs 80.3% (95% CI 77.3–83.3) for 167 technicians; false negatives 3.2 vs 44.3 per 1,000 patients (relative risk of a missed diagnosis 14.1 for technicians, 95% CI 10.4–19.0); false positives 12 vs 5 per 1,000 patient-days.
Johnson LS, et al. Nat Med. 2025;31(3):925-931. 10.1038/s41591-025-03516-x
Discussão e crítica

The largest head-to-head of AI against human technicians for ambulatory ECG, supporting AI-first reporting with physician review. It is an accuracy study, not an outcome trial: the reference standard was a cardiologist-adjudicated random sample of 5,235 events rather than every recording, the comparison was not randomised, and the price of the very high sensitivity was a higher false-positive burden that physicians must absorb.