Recent quotes:

Next for Apple Watch: a clinical trial with J&J to track heart health - STAT

Typically, clinical trials use their own research infrastructure to track how patients do, but the HEARTLINE trial will plug into insurance claims databases to track patients. This approach, called a pragmatic clinical trial, could be cheaper and more efficient than the way studies are conducted now, without sacrificing the clarity and certainty that comes from having a control group in a study. But this is also risky: Using insurance claims data this way is new and untested. “It’s certainly a vast and gross departure form the bricks and mortar model,” said Gibson. “This is one of the most exciting things, the idea that you’re going to find participants through the media, the news, potentially through insurers and even health care providers.”

A deep neural network learning algorithm outperforms a conventional algorithm for emergency department electrocardiogram interpretation - ScienceDirect

Cardiologs® vs. Veritas® accuracy for finding a major abnormality was 92.2% vs. 87.2% (p < 0.0001), with comparable sensitivity (88.7% vs. 92.0%, p = 0.086), improved specificity (94.0% vs. 84.7%, p < 0.0001) and improved positive predictive value (PPV 88.2% vs. 75.4%, p < 0.0001). Cardiologs® had accurate ECG interpretation for 72.0% (95% CI: 69.6–74.2) of ECGs vs. 59.8% (57.3–62.3) for Veritas® (P < 0.0001). Sensitivity for any abnormal group for Cardiologs® and Veritas®, respectively, was 69.6% (95CI 66.7–72.3) vs. 68.3% (95CI 65.3–71.1) (NS). Positive Predictive Value was 74.0% (71.1–76.7) for Cardiologs® vs. 56.5% (53.7–59.3) for Veritas® (P < 0.0001).