Artificial intelligence in electrocardiogram interpretation for cardiovascular diagnosis and risk prediction: a systematic review of evidence through May 2026

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis has expanded across cardiovascular diagnosis, monitoring, and risk prediction, but published studies vary in methodology, validation, and clinical applicability. We systematically reviewed AI applications in ECG interpretation for cardiovascular diagnosis and risk prediction to define the evidence available through May 2026. Methods This systematic review followed PRISMA 2020. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception through May 2026 for original human studies evaluating artificial intelligence, machine learning, or deep learning applications in ECG-based cardiovascular detection, classification, diagnosis, monitoring, or risk prediction. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. Because of substantial heterogeneity in study populations, ECG modalities, model architectures, validation strategies, and reported outcomes, findings were synthesized narratively. Results A total of 108 studies were included. Arrhythmia detection, particularly atrial fibrillation (AF), was the most mature and frequently evaluated application domain. Benchmark-based studies commonly reported high apparent performance, whereas larger clinical cohorts and externally validated studies generally showed more moderate but more clinically credible estimates. The most common methodological limitations were concentrated in the analysis domain, particularly limited external validation, overfitting risk, unclear train-test separation, class imbalance, and incomplete reporting of calibration and robustness. Conclusions AI-enabled ECG interpretation shows strongest support for arrhythmia detection and automated ECG classification, while structural disease screening and prognostic modeling remain promising but less mature. Future studies should prioritize prospective, multicenter, externally validated, and workflow-integrated designs with transparent reporting, calibration assessment, cost-effectiveness evaluation, and equitable assessment across diverse populations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
Published
2026-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-026-06234-5
Primary Topic
ECG Monitoring and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial intelligence in electrocardiogram interpretation for cardiovascular diagnosis and risk prediction: a systematic review of evidence through May 2026

Ragda Ali, H. E. Omer, Rufida Salih, Razan Hassan et al.
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
ECG Monitoring and Analysis
article

Artificial intelligence in electrocardiogram interpretation for cardiovascular diagnosis and risk prediction: a systematic review of evidence through May 2026

Ragda Ali, H. E. Omer, Rufida Salih, Razan Hassan, N. Abdelrahman, Ali Mohamedshata, Mazen Ahmed, Heba Elabadi, Esra Abdalla, Mohamed Elhussain, Salwan Mustafa, Fatima Ahmed, Esraa Mustafa
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis has expanded across cardiovascular diagnosis, monitoring, and risk prediction, but published studies vary in methodology, validation, and clinical applicability. We systematically reviewed AI applications in ECG interpretation for cardiovascular diagnosis and risk prediction to define the evidence available through May 2026. Methods This systematic review followed PRISMA 2020. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception through May 2026 for original human studies evaluating artificial intelligence, machine learning, or deep learning applications in ECG-based cardiovascular detection, classification, diagnosis, monitoring, or risk prediction. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. Because of substantial heterogeneity in study populations, ECG modalities, model architectures, validation strategies, and reported outcomes, findings were synthesized narratively. Results A total of 108 studies were included. Arrhythmia detection, particularly atrial fibrillation (AF), was the most mature and frequently evaluated application domain. Benchmark-based studies commonly reported high apparent performance, whereas larger clinical cohorts and externally validated studies generally showed more moderate but more clinically credible estimates. The most common methodological limitations were concentrated in the analysis domain, particularly limited external validation, overfitting risk, unclear train-test separation, class imbalance, and incomplete reporting of calibration and robustness. Conclusions AI-enabled ECG interpretation shows strongest support for arrhythmia detection and automated ECG classification, while structural disease screening and prognostic modeling remain promising but less mature. Future studies should prioritize prospective, multicenter, externally validated, and workflow-integrated designs with transparent reporting, calibration assessment, cost-effectiveness evaluation, and equitable assessment across diverse populations.

BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
University of North Alabama (US), University of Khartoum (SD), Wayne State University (US), SUNY Upstate Medical University (US), Hurley Medical Center (US), Jacksonville University (US), Beaumont Hospital, Dearborn (US), St. John Medical Center (US), Corewell Health, Ahfad University for Women (SD), Michigan State University (US), University of Toledo (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
ECG Monitoring and Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.