Abstract
Electrocardiography is one of the most frequently used methods to evaluate cardiovascular diseases. However, the last decade has shown that deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) can extract information from the electrocardiogram (ECG) that goes beyond traditional diagnostics, such as predicting a persons age. In this study, we trained two different 1-dimensional CNNs on open datasets to predict age from a persons ECG.
The models were trained and validated using 10 seconds long 12-lead ECG records, resampled to 100Hz. 59355 ECGs were used for training and cross-validation, while 21748 ECGs from a separate cohort were used as the test set. We compared the performance achieved on the cross-validation with the performance on the test set. Furthermore, we used cardiologist annotated cardiovascular conditions to categorize the patients in the test set in order to assess whether some cardiac condition leads to greater discrepancies between CNN-predicted age and chronological age.
The best CNN model, using an Inception Time architecture, showed a significant drop in performance, in terms of mean absolute error (MAE), from cross-validation on the training set (7.90 ± 0.04 years) to the performance on the test set (8.3 years). On the other hand, the mean squared error (MSE) improved from the training set (117.5 ± 2.7 years2) to the test set (111 years2). We also observed that the cardiovascular condition that showed the highest deviation between predicted and biological age, in terms of MAE, was the patients with pacing rhythm (10.5 years), while the patients with prolonged QT-interval had the smallest deviation (7.4 years) in terms of MAE.
This work contributes to existing knowledge of age prediction using deep CNNs on ECGs by showing how a trained model performs on a test set from a separate cohort to that used in the training set.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study used ONLY openly available human data that were originally located at https://physionet.org/ and were also used and described in the George Moody Challenge 2021 (https://moody-challenge.physionet.org/2021/)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
One of the authors name was spelled wrong. Corrected this
Data Availability
All data produced are available online at https://physionet.org/ and https://moody-challenge.physionet.org/2021/