CSE database: extended annotations and new recommendations for ECG software testing
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
28040865
DOI
10.1007/s11517-016-1607-5
PII: 10.1007/s11517-016-1607-5
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Annotation of ECG record, CSE database, ECG, ECG classification, Recommendations, Software testing,
- MeSH
- databáze faktografické normy MeSH
- diagnóza počítačová normy MeSH
- elektrokardiografie normy MeSH
- kardiovaskulární nemoci diagnóza MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- senzitivita a specificita MeSH
- směrnice pro lékařskou praxi jako téma * MeSH
- validace softwaru * MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Česká republika MeSH
Nowadays, cardiovascular diseases represent the most common cause of death in western countries. Among various examination techniques, electrocardiography (ECG) is still a highly valuable tool used for the diagnosis of many cardiovascular disorders. In order to diagnose a person based on ECG, cardiologists can use automatic diagnostic algorithms. Research in this area is still necessary. In order to compare various algorithms correctly, it is necessary to test them on standard annotated databases, such as the Common Standards for Quantitative Electrocardiography (CSE) database. According to Scopus, the CSE database is the second most cited standard database. There were two main objectives in this work. First, new diagnoses were added to the CSE database, which extended its original annotations. Second, new recommendations for diagnostic software quality estimation were established. The ECG recordings were diagnosed by five new cardiologists independently, and in total, 59 different diagnoses were found. Such a large number of diagnoses is unique, even in terms of standard databases. Based on the cardiologists' diagnoses, a four-round consensus (4R consensus) was established. Such a 4R consensus means a correct final diagnosis, which should ideally be the output of any tested classification software. The accuracy of the cardiologists' diagnoses compared with the 4R consensus was the basis for the establishment of accuracy recommendations. The accuracy was determined in terms of sensitivity = 79.20-86.81%, positive predictive value = 79.10-87.11%, and the Jaccard coefficient = 72.21-81.14%, respectively. Within these ranges, the accuracy of the software is comparable with the accuracy of cardiologists. The accuracy quantification of the correct classification is unique. Diagnostic software developers can objectively evaluate the success of their algorithm and promote its further development. The annotations and recommendations proposed in this work will allow for faster development and testing of classification software. As a result, this might facilitate cardiologists' work and lead to faster diagnoses and earlier treatment.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
J Electrocardiol. 2008 Nov-Dec;41(6):630-5 PubMed
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004 Jul;51(7):1196-206 PubMed
N Engl J Med. 1991 Dec 19;325(25):1767-73 PubMed
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2006 May;44(5):393-403 PubMed
Eur Heart J. 1992 Sep;13(9):1164-72 PubMed
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2015 Sep;19(5):1660-71 PubMed
Heart Rhythm. 2015 Jun;12(6):e41-63 PubMed
Circulation. 2000 Jun 13;101(23):E215-20 PubMed
Comput Cardiol. 2008;2008:505-508 PubMed
J Med Syst. 2012 Feb;36(1):279-89 PubMed
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986 Mar;7(3):661-70 PubMed
Heart Rhythm. 2013 Dec;10(12):1932-63 PubMed
Neurology. 1999 Oct 22;53(7):1590-2 PubMed
Europace. 2007 Jul;9(7):466-70 PubMed
Comput Biol Med. 2011 Jan;41(1):37-45 PubMed
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2003 Mar;41(2):172-82 PubMed
Circulation. 1985 Mar;71(3):523-34 PubMed
Circulation. 2007 Mar 13;115(10):1325-32 PubMed
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 20;10 (3):e0118504 PubMed
Biomed Instrum Technol. 1992 Mar-Apr;26(2):124-32 PubMed
Eur Heart J. 1985 Oct;6(10):815-25 PubMed
IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 1997 Nov-Dec;16(6):25-32 PubMed
Pathologies affect the performance of ECG signals compression
A Comparative Analysis of Methods for Evaluation of ECG Signal Quality after Compression