On Merging Feature Engineering and Deep Learning for Diagnosis, Risk-Prediction and Age Estimation Based on the 12-Lead ECG
Authors:
Eran Zvuloni,
Jesse Read,
Antônio H. Ribeiro,
Antonio Luiz P. Ribeiro,
Joachim A. Behar
Abstract:
Objective: Machine learning techniques have been used extensively for 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis. For physiological time series, deep learning (DL) superiority to feature engineering (FE) approaches based on domain knowledge is still an open question. Moreover, it remains unclear whether combining DL with FE may improve performance. Methods: We considered three tasks intending to add…
▽ More
Objective: Machine learning techniques have been used extensively for 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis. For physiological time series, deep learning (DL) superiority to feature engineering (FE) approaches based on domain knowledge is still an open question. Moreover, it remains unclear whether combining DL with FE may improve performance. Methods: We considered three tasks intending to address these research gaps: cardiac arrhythmia diagnosis (multiclass-multilabel classification), atrial fibrillation risk prediction (binary classification), and age estimation (regression). We used an overall dataset of 2.3M 12-lead ECG recordings to train the following models for each task: i) a random forest taking the FE as input was trained as a classical machine learning approach; ii) an end-to-end DL model; and iii) a merged model of FE+DL. Results: FE yielded comparable results to DL while necessitating significantly less data for the two classification tasks and it was outperformed by DL for the regression task. For all tasks, merging FE with DL did not improve performance over DL alone. Conclusion: We found that for traditional 12-lead ECG based diagnosis tasks DL did not yield a meaningful improvement over FE, while it improved significantly the nontraditional regression task. We also found that combining FE with DL did not improve over DL alone which suggests that the FE were redundant with the features learned by DL. Significance: Our findings provides important recommendations on what machine learning strategy and data regime to chose with respect to the task at hand for the development of new machine learning models based on the 12-lead ECG.
△ Less
Submitted 16 July, 2022; v1 submitted 13 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
Automatic diagnosis of the 12-lead ECG using a deep neural network
Authors:
Antônio H. Ribeiro,
Manoel Horta Ribeiro,
Gabriela M. M. Paixão,
Derick M. Oliveira,
Paulo R. Gomes,
Jéssica A. Canazart,
Milton P. S. Ferreira,
Carl R. Andersson,
Peter W. Macfarlane,
Wagner Meira Jr.,
Thomas B. Schön,
Antonio Luiz P. Ribeiro
Abstract:
The role of automatic electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis in clinical practice is limited by the accuracy of existing models. Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are models composed of stacked transformations that learn tasks by examples. This technology has recently achieved striking success in a variety of task and there are great expectations on how it might improve clinical practice. Here we present a DN…
▽ More
The role of automatic electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis in clinical practice is limited by the accuracy of existing models. Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are models composed of stacked transformations that learn tasks by examples. This technology has recently achieved striking success in a variety of task and there are great expectations on how it might improve clinical practice. Here we present a DNN model trained in a dataset with more than 2 million labeled exams analyzed by the Telehealth Network of Minas Gerais and collected under the scope of the CODE (Clinical Outcomes in Digital Electrocardiology) study. The DNN outperform cardiology resident medical doctors in recognizing 6 types of abnormalities in 12-lead ECG recordings, with F1 scores above 80% and specificity over 99%. These results indicate ECG analysis based on DNNs, previously studied in a single-lead setup, generalizes well to 12-lead exams, taking the technology closer to the standard clinical practice.
△ Less
Submitted 14 April, 2020; v1 submitted 1 April, 2019;
originally announced April 2019.
