Source author record

Stefan Williams

Stefan Williams appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Analysis of an adaptive lead weighted ResNet for multiclass classification of 12-lead ECGs

Background: Twelve lead ECGs are a core diagnostic tool for cardiovascular diseases. Here, we describe and analyse an ensemble deep neural network architecture to classify 24 cardiac abnormalities from 12-lead ECGs. Method: We proposed a squeeze and excite ResNet to automatically learn deep features from 12-lead ECGs, in order to identify 24 cardiac conditions. The deep features were augmented with age and gender features in the final fully connected layers. Output thresholds for each class were set using a constrained grid search. To determine why the model made incorrect predictions, two expert clinicians independently interpreted a random set of 100 misclassified ECGs concerning Left Axis Deviation. Results: Using the bespoke weighted accuracy metric, we achieved a 5-fold cross validation score of 0.684, and sensitivity and specificity of 0.758 and 0.969, respectively. We scored 0.520 on the full test data, and ranked 2nd out of 41 in the official challenge rankings. On a random set of misclassified ECGs, agreement between two clinicians and training labels was poor (clinician 1: kappa = -0.057, clinician 2: kappa = -0.159). In contrast, agreement between the clinicians was very high (kappa = 0.92). Discussion: The proposed prediction model performed well on the validation and hidden test data in comparison to models trained on the same data. We also discovered considerable inconsistency in training labels, which is likely to hinder development of more accurate models.