Although AI demonstrated promising diagnostic and prognostic performance across multiple cardiovascular conditions, most applications remain at the validation stage, and future research should prioritise implementation science, pragmatic evaluation, and real-world evidence to facilitate routine adoption and maximise patient benefit and healthcare value.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming cardiovascular medicine through applications in disease detection, diagnosis, risk prediction, and clinical decision support. However, the clinical implementation of these technologies remains poorly characterised. This systematic review evaluated the current landscape of AI applications in cardiovascular medicine, focusing on implementation maturity and clinical translation. The review followed PRISMA guidelines and a prospectively registered PROSPERO protocol. Data extraction included study characteristics, cardiovascular domain, AI methodology, clinical application, validation strategy and implementation maturity, assessed using a predefined five-level framework. AI methodologies were classified as conventional machine learning, deep learning, hybrid ML/deep learning, multimodal AI, or large language models/generative AI. Seventy-four studies met the eligibility criteria. Conventional machine learning was the most frequently used methodology (47.3%), followed by deep learning (41.9%), whereas multimodal AI (5.4%), hybrid ML/deep learning (2.7%), and large language models/generative AI (2.7%) were uncommon. Applications focused mainly on screening and early detection (31.1%), risk stratification and prognosis (25.7%), treatment planning (16.2%), diagnosis (13.5%), and monitoring (12.2%). Most studies reached implementation maturity Level 3 (clinical validation, 47.3%) or Level 2 (technical validation, 35.1%), while only 13.5% achieved routine clinical implementation (Level 5) and 4.1% reached clinical deployment (Level 4). Although AI demonstrated promising diagnostic and prognostic performance across multiple cardiovascular conditions, most applications remain at the validation stage. Future research should prioritise implementation science, pragmatic evaluation, and real-world evidence to facilitate routine adoption and maximise patient benefit and healthcare value.
Evidence is provided that ensemble-based frameworks currently offer the most effective balance between predictive accuracy, robustness, and clinical feasibility, and future research should emphasize multi-center external validation and explainable AI frameworks.
Marium Shaikh, Hanmant Fadewar· International Journal For Mu...· 0 citations
Future work should prioritize calibration, robustness, transportability, fairness, interpretability, regulatory clarity, workflow integration, and prospective evidence of decision impact or post-deployment benefit, as well as major barriers remain.
Rui-Feng Liu, Ross Arena, V. Vasile et al.· Progress in cardiovascular d...· 0 citations
AI demonstrates strong potential to improve the effectiveness, safety, and quality of healthcare, however, broader clinical adoption remains constrained by regulatory requirements, interpretability gaps, data quality issues, and workflow integration challenges, underscoring the need for stronger validation practices an...
Ghulam Hussain Noori, Shaista Bibi, Seung Won Lee· Inquiry : a journal of medic...· 0 citations
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used to convert heterogeneous clinical data into actionable predictions across chronic disease pathways, yet the maturity and clinical role of AI differ substantially among diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and cancer. This structured comparative evidence synthesis eva...
Reshmi Gopalakrishnan· Natural Resources for Human...· 0 citations
The findings indicate that tree-based ML models such as Random Forest, XGBoost, and Gradient Boosting shows the strong performance on structured clinical datasets, and ensemble learning models shows the superior performance and generalization capabilities across several distinct datasets.
Anuja Gaikwad, Nilima Kulkarnir· Journal of Intelligent Decis...· 0 citations
The reviewed literature indicates that machine learning, deep learning, explainable AI, and human–AI collaboration can improve diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and patient-centered care, but challenges related to data privacy, algorithmic bias, explainability, cybersecurity, clinical validation, regulation, and unequal...
Unknown authors· Journal of Cognitive Human-C...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.