A high-performance, lightweight deep learning framework for accurate detection of single-lead ECG arrhythmias


Abstract

Cardiac arrhythmia, a common sign of cardiovascular disease, is a primary cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Timely detection and categorisation of arrhythmias are essential for successful therapeutic intervention. Here, we present a novel hybrid deep learning model that employs single-lead ECG signals to accurately and efficiently classify arrhythmias by merging CNN, channel attention modules, and GRU(Gated Recurrent Units). This technique is optimised for resource-constrained settings, including Internet of Things (IoT) based systems and wearable medical equipment. The proposed framework utilises a four-layer CNN for local feature extraction, attention methods to emphasise clinically pertinent segments, and GRUs to record temporal dependencies, effectively addressing issues such as vanishing gradients in sequential data modelling. Additionally, to solve class imbalance and improve predictive performance on minority classes, the SMOTE-Tomek hybrid sampling method is employed. The model underwent thorough evaluation on two benchmark datasets, MIT-BIH Arrhythmia and INCART, attaining classification accuracies of 99.23% and 99.58%, along with macro F1-scores of 95.11% and 96.80%, respectively. The proposed model outperforms existing ECG single lead classification models in accuracy, F1-score, and sensitivity, highlighting its potential for real-time arrhythmia identification in clinical and remote environments.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].