Erratum: Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups

, Frontiers Production Office

doi:10.3389/fcvm.2024.1396396

ERRATUM article

Front. Cardiovasc. Med. , 14 March 2024

Sec. Cardiac Rhythmology

Volume 11 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1396396

This article is part of the Research Topic Artificial Intelligence in Cardiac Rhythmology View all 8 articles

Erratum: Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups

This article is an erratum on:

Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups
1. Read original article

$\r\nFrontiers Production Office \r\n$ Frontiers Production Office*

Frontiers Media SA, Lausanne, Switzerland

An Erratum on:

Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups

By Saglietto A, Baccega D, Esposito R, Anselmino M, Dusi V, Fiandrotti A and De Ferrari GM (2024). Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 11:1327179. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1327179

Due to a production error, the first sentence of the Results paragraph in the abstract was incorrectly given as “The CNN based on single-lead ECG (D1) outperformed the one based on the standard 12-lead framework [with an average percentage difference of the area under the curve (AUC) of −8.7%].”.

This has been corrected to “The CNN based on single-lead ECG (D1) achieved satisfactory performance compared to the standard 12-lead framework (average percentage AUC difference: −8.7%).”

The publisher apologizes for this mistake. The original version of this article has been updated.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, deep learning, electrocardiogram, single-lead, screening

Citation: Frontiers Production Office (2024) Erratum: Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 11:1396396. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1396396

Received: 5 March 2024; Accepted: 5 March 2024;
Published: 14 March 2024.

Approved by: Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland

© 2024 Frontiers Production Office. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Frontiers Production Office cHJvZHVjdGlvbi5vZmZpY2VAZnJvbnRpZXJzaW4ub3Jn

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Erratum: Convolutional neural network (CNN)-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis: a comparison between standard twelve-lead and single-lead setups

94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good

94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good