
Citation: Ajay Pradhan, Per-Erik Olsson. Regulation of zebrafish gonadal sex differentiation[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2016, 3(4): 567-584. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2016.4.567
[1] | Zhongnan Ran, Mingfeng Jiang, Yang Li, Zhefeng Wang, Yongquan Wu, Wei Ke, Ling Xia . Arrhythmia classification based on multi-feature multi-path parallel deep convolutional neural networks and improved focal loss. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(4): 5521-5535. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024243 |
[2] | Eleonora Sulas, Monica Urru, Roberto Tumbarello, Luigi Raffo, Danilo Pani . Systematic analysis of single- and multi-reference adaptive filters for non-invasive fetal electrocardiography. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(1): 286-308. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020016 |
[3] | Peng Zhang, Mingfeng Jiang, Yang Li, Ling Xia, Zhefeng Wang, Yongquan Wu, Yaming Wang, Huaxiong Zhang . An efficient ECG denoising method by fusing ECA-Net and CycleGAN. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 13415-13433. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023598 |
[4] | Enes Efe, Emrehan Yavsan . AttBiLFNet: A novel hybrid network for accurate and efficient arrhythmia detection in imbalanced ECG signals. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(4): 5863-5880. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024259 |
[5] | Chunkai Zhang, Yingyang Chen, Ao Yin, Xuan Wang . Anomaly detection in ECG based on trend symbolic aggregate approximation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(4): 2154-2167. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019105 |
[6] | Yuni Zeng, Hang Lv, Mingfeng Jiang, Jucheng Zhang, Ling Xia, Yaming Wang, Zhikang Wang . Deep arrhythmia classification based on SENet and lightweight context transform. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(1): 1-17. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023001 |
[7] | Diguo Zhai, Xinqi Bao, Xi Long, Taotao Ru, Guofu Zhou . Precise detection and localization of R-peaks from ECG signals. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(11): 19191-19208. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023848 |
[8] | Xiaowen Jia, Jingxia Chen, Kexin Liu, Qian Wang, Jialing He . Multimodal depression detection based on an attention graph convolution and transformer. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(3): 652-676. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025024 |
[9] | Mingming Zhang, Huiyuan Jin, Ying Yang . ECG classification efficient modeling with artificial bee colony optimization data augmentation and attention mechanism. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(3): 4626-4647. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024203 |
[10] | Wei Zhong, Li Mao, Wei Du . A signal quality assessment method for fetal QRS complexes detection. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(5): 7943-7956. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023344 |
Data from the World Heart Federation shows that the number of people with cardiovascular disease worldwide has exceeded 500 million. Known as the number one killer that threatens human health, cardiovascular disease is increasingly occurring in young people, including cardiac arrhythmia. An effective way to diagnose arrhythmia is to use electrocardiogram (ECG) signals, which contain important information for diagnosing the type of abnormal heart rhythm. But some information is less differentiated and an experienced physician is required. Therefore, automatic arrhythmia detection is particularly important.
To date, there have been numerous studies on arrhythmia detection, including ECG signal preprocessing, feature extraction and classification models. In ECG signal preprocessing, noise reduction techniques are widely used to remove artifacts from baseline wander, powerline interference, electrode motion, muscle artifacts, etc. Feature extraction is crucial in ECG signal classification, but the classification results are heavily dependent on the complex feature extraction process, which cannot adapt to different application environments and may result in some important information loss. As deep learning techniques evolve, features will become automatically selectable and classification tasks will become processable end-to-end. Such techniques are also widely used in arrhythmia detection. However, plenty of studies focus on single lead information, and the interpretability is not strong. At the same time, multi-lead data requires analysis of the relationship between leads and the heartbeats within the lead as shown in Figure 1. In this figure, the ECG signals include 12 leads, i.e., Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, AVR, AVL, AVF, V1, V2, V3, V4, V5 and V6. Each lead (marked in green) contains information on multiple heartbeats, which are called single-lead beats (marked in red). Single-lead beats in the same time interval in multiple leads constitute one multi-lead beat (marked in blue). However, many studies have focused on the diagnosis of one-dimensional lead information or simple multi-lead information fusion, which cannot make good use of the comprehensive information in multi-lead signals, such as the relationship between the leads and heartbeats, or the relationship between multi-lead beats and single-lead beats.
In summary, it is critical to simultaneously construct intra-lead and inter-lead correlations in the model for multi-lead arrhythmia detection. The instances (nodes) in the graph are associated with other nodes through complex correlations that are available to capture their interrelationships. Heterogeneous graphs take into account the rich interactions between multiple types of nodes and edges. Multi-lead ECG signals include different node types such as multi-lead beats, single-lead beats, and individual leads, meanwhile, they have complicated relationships among them. Therefore, in a study on arrhythmia detection using multi-lead ECG signals, heterogeneous graphs are suitable for modeling heartbeat data. The embedding of each node in the graph is jointly represented by the characteristics of the node and related nodes. In addition, interaction-related information is derived by means of information propagation between neighboring nodes in the graph.
To capture the rich interactions in multi-lead ECG signal data, an arrhythmia detection framework based on a heterogeneous graph attention network (MADHGAT) is developed in this work. A heterogeneous graph has been modeled for multi-lead ECG signals to integrate diverse data, which contains single-lead beats, multi-lead beats and multiple leads as nodes, additionally, intra-lead and inter-lead correlations are constructed. Heterogeneous graph attention networks (HGATs) are utilized for heterogeneous graph embedding to perform multi-lead beat classification as arrhythmia detection. Implementing a dual-level attention strategy in the HGAT allows for the learning of node-level and type-level contributions of adjacent nodes. The proposed framework does not need require any feature extraction for the ECG signals. We describe extensive experiments and show the effectiveness of the proposed model. The following key contributions of this work are summarized.
1) A heterogeneous graph has been modeled for multi-lead ECG signals to capture rich information, which can integrate diverse signal information and consider the inter-lead and intra-lead correlations at the same time.
2) An arrhythmia detection framework with HGATs is proposed for heterogeneous graph embedding and automatic cardiac arrhythmia classification. The implementation of a dual-level attention strategy in the HGAT permits the capture of the complex interactions between different heartbeat nodes and different node types.
3) To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that multi-lead ECG signals have been modeled as a heterogeneous graph and HGATs have been employed for cardiac arrhythmia classification.
4) The results of extensive experiments indicate that the proposed model is able to well integrate the information of multiple leads, and results in significant improvements when applied to the INCART dataset without any feature extraction.
Automatic arrhythmia detection algorithms for ECG signal data usually have three main tasks, which include data preprocessing, feature extraction and classification [1]. The preprocessing operations include data denoising [2] and heartbeat segmentation [3]. Feature extraction is crucial in ECG signal classification. Features can be extracted from the ECG signal's shape in the spatiotemporal domain, such as the QRS complex [4], R-peak [5], ST segment [6], Shannon entropy [7] and T duration [8]. Finally, signals are categorized into different types by machine learning methods, such as multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) [9], k-nearest neighbors [10], deep learning methods [11,12] and support vector machines [13]. However, the classification results heavily rely on a complex feature extraction process, which cannot be adapted to various environments. Additionally, missing important information may lead to misdiagnosis. Deep learning methods play an important role in automatic feature extraction, which are widely utilized for feature extraction [14,15,16] or arrhythmia detection [17,18,19] in an end-to-end mode without any handcrafted features. Deep learning methods reduce the amount of manual work and improve the detection performance. As shown in Figure 1, correlations among multi-lead ECG signals constitute important information for arrhythmia detection. However, most existing works regard beats as independent information, ignoring the intra-lead correlations among beats and the inter-lead correlations among leads.
ECG signals are shown as time-series data, so the intra-lead correlations among beats are mainly reflected in the temporal properties, which include statistical time features [20,21,22] and temporal dependency [23,24,25]. The temporal properties have been considered for both single-lead signals and multi-lead signals. Mahajan et al. [22] collected time-frequency data and linear and nonlinear features for single-lead ECG signal classification. Yao et al. [26] developed a time-incremental network based on an attention mechanism. It considered the spatial and temporal features of multi-lead ECG signals. Che et al. [27] developed a deep learning framework that integrated a transformer network into a convolutional neural network to capture the temporal features of multi-lead ECG signals. Compared to single-lead ECG signals, multi-lead signals contain more complex and abundant information on heartbeats, which is useful for achieving a more accurate cardiac disease diagnosis. However, some works only consider the temporal properties in ECG signals, ignoring the inter-lead correlations in multi-lead data as well as the correlations between multi lead beats and single-lead beats.
Various works have been proposed for automatic arrhythmia diagnosis based on multi-lead ECG signal data, such as studies focused on feature fusion [28,29,30] and inter-lead correlations [31,32,33]. Han and Shi [34] detected and located myocardial infarction through the use of a multi-lead residual neural network and feature fusion for 12-lead ECG signal data. Sepahvand and Abdali-Mohammadi [35] developed a multi-lead ECG personal recognition system, which calculated intra-correlations and cross-correlations among multi-lead signal data in the time-frequency domain to estimate functional dependencies. Different leads correspond to different aspects of heart activity. These works take multi-lead signals into consideration, thus improving the accuracy of arrhythmia diagnoses. However, feature fusion of multiple single-lead signals cannot systematically exploit the inter-lead signal correlations. Additionally, a majority of the aforementioned studies did not consider the intra-lead correlations between beats.
Graph neural networks include graph convolutional networks [36], graph attention networks [37], graph spatiotemporal networks [38], etc. They are applied successfully for many tasks, such as computer vision [39], traffic forecasting [38], protein interface prediction [40] and disease prediction [41]. However, there is no related work on automatic arrhythmia diagnosis with multi-lead ECG signals. Each element in a graph neural network is taken as a node while the relationships between elements are denoted by edges. The structure of homogeneous graphs [42,43], which only contain a single type of nodes and edges, is relatively simple. Therefore, graph neural networks for homogeneous graphs just need to aggregate a single type of neighbors to update the embedding of nodes. For example, a graph convolutional neural network was proposed to diagnose pneumonia caused by COVID-19 [44]. However, a majority of graphs in the real world should be constructed into heterogeneous graphs in consideration of the complex interactions among diverse nodes and edges, thus avoiding information loss. Compared to homogeneous graphs, the difference between neighbors in different relationships should be taken into consideration in heterogeneous graphs [45,46]. For example, a heterogeneous network with a variational graph auto-encoder is presented for miRNA-disease association prediction [47]. Therefore, in consideration of the various information types and relationships associated with multi-lead ECG signals, a heterogeneous graph can be constructed to capture the complex correlations within multi-lead ECG signal data for the task of automatic arrhythmia diagnosis, thereby improving diagnosis performance.
We present an automatic arrhythmia detection framework based on an HGAT, which fully exploits both intra-lead correlations between beats and inter-lead correlations between leads based on the information spread along the graph. A flexible heterogeneous graph is presented first to model multi-lead ECG signal data and integrate abundant information as well as to capture the dependencies among multi-lead beats, single-lead beats and multiple leads, as shown in Figure 2. Then, we present a heterogeneous graph network with a dual-level attention strategy to embed the heterogeneous graph for arrhythmia detection. HGATs take into account information heterogeneity. Moreover, the attention strategy is able to learn the weights of different heartbeat nodes and node types.
Multi-lead beats were merely regarded as data objects for arrhythmia detection via multi-lead ECG signal data analysis in previous studies. Excluding for multi-lead beats, two types of additional information are considered, i.e., multiple leads and single-lead beats. As illustrated in Figure 2, the heterogeneous graph G=(V,E) is constructed to model multiple leads ML={ml1,…,mlD}, multi-lead beats MB={mb1,…,mbN} and single-lead beats SB={sb1,…,sbK} as nodes, where V=ML⋃MB⋃SB. The collection of edges E indicates their correlations and K=D×N.
In detail, for the nodes of multiple leads, mean pooling is performed for the corresponding samples of all single-lead beats from the same lead, which realizes the embedding of every individual lead. For each multi-lead beat node, its representation is obtained by pooling the corresponding samples of all single-lead beats which constitute this multi-lead beat. For a better understanding of the constructed graph, an example is shown in Figure 3. Let us suppose that there are three multi-lead beats in the dataset, i.e., A1, A2 and A3. The whole graph contains 12 leads and each red box marks a single-lead beat. For each single-lead beat node, its feature is represented by its samples. Regarding each multi-lead heartbeat node–with A3 taken as an example, it is represented by pooling all single-lead beats comprising this multi-lead heartbeat. For the nodes of multiple leads, individual leads are represented by pooling the single-lead beats of A1, A2 and A3 in this lead.
So far, the maximum number of multiple leads for ECG signals is typically 12, so the maximum value of D is 12. We assign each multi-lead beat to these D leads. Therefore, the edge between one multi-lead beat and every individual lead has been built to enable analysis of the global significance of individual leads for arrhythmia detection and inter-lead correlations through the use of information propagation along the graph.
The beat segments in every lead are regarded as the nodes of single-lead beats. The embedding of one single-lead beat is the time series of samples and the embedding of one multi-lead beat is the mean pooling of multiple single-lead beats in this multi-lead beat. The edge between one multi-lead beat and one single-lead beat is built if one multi-lead beat contains this single-lead beat, providing information on the correlations between multi-lead beats and their corresponding single-lead beats, as well as the local significance of every single-lead beat for arrhythmia detection.
To further enhance multi-lead information and information propagation, the relationships between single-lead beats are considered. The edge between two single-lead beats is built if they belong to the same lead, which provides information on the inter-lead correlations. By incorporating multiple leads, single-lead beats and the correlations, the information of multi-lead beats is enriched, which greatly facilitates arrhythmia detection.
The HGAT [48] is utilized for heterogeneous graph embedding and then arrhythmia detection, as shown in Figure 4. The HGAT considers the heterogeneity in the information on leads and beats via heterogeneous graph convolution. Furthermore, a dual-layer attention mechanism in the HGAT can capture and learn node-level and type-level importance between adjacent nodes in heterogeneous graphs. Finally, the labels of the multi-lead beats are predicted by a softmax layer.
For heterogeneous graph construction, three types of nodes have been modeled: multiple leads, multi-lead beats and single-lead beats. Though their feature space can be the same and a graph convolutional network can be adopted for heterogeneous graph embedding via the feature space concatenation of these three types of nodes P={p1,p2,p3}. Nevertheless, the performance will be degraded because the heterogeneity of distinct node types is not considered. To solve this problem, we adopt a heterogeneous graph convolutional network, which takes into account the distinction between different types of nodes and projects each of them with respective adjacency and transformation matrices into hidden space, as described by Eq (4.1).
H(l+1)=σ(∑pi∈P˜Api⋅H(l)pi⋅W(l)pi) | (4.1) |
where σ(·) is the activation function. ˜Api∈R|V|×|Vpi| is the submatrix of the normalized adjacency matrix ˜A and is the adjacency matrix of each type pi, whose rows and columns respectively denote all nodes and their adjacent nodes of the type pi. The hidden embeddings of the nodes represented by H(l+1)∈R|V|×q(l+1) are learned by assembling information from their adjacent nodes of H(l)pi∈R|Vpi|×q(l) with different types pi by using the corresponding transformation matrix W(l)pi∈Rq(l)×q(l+1). q(l) is the dimension of hidden embeddings in the lth layer. The transformation matrix W(l)pi considers the distinctiveness of different feature spaces that are projected into the hidden space Rq(l+1).
For a node in our graph, its adjacent nodes may include different types of nodes. In general, the information contained in different kinds of nodes has different contribution degrees. As we know, each lead in the ECG contributes differently to arrhythmia detection. Different weights are beneficial to better highlight important features in the ECG signal data. To capture more effective information about neighboring nodes, a dual-level attention strategy is applied to determine the different contributions at the node level and type level.
Type-level attention is used to capture the importance of different node types, such as multi-lead beats or single-lead beats. Specifically, given a node v, the sum of the adjacent node embeddings hv′ with the type pi is used to express the embedding of type pi as hpi=∑v′∈Nv˜Avv′hv′. ˜Avv′ is one element of the normalized adjacency matrix ˜A, where the row is v and the column is v′. Then, the type-level attention score is computed by using the current node embedding hv and type embedding hpi according to Eq (4.2):
api=σ(μTpi⋅[hv‖hpi]) | (4.2) |
where σ(⋅) is the activation function and ‖ represents "concatenate". μpi is the attention vector for type pi, which is learned in the process of model training.
Finally, the attention score for each type is normalized by Eq (4.3) to obtain the attention weights at the type level.
αpi=exp(api)∑pj∈Pexp(apj) | (4.3) |
Different neighbors also have different contributions. The node-level attention is developed to capture the weights of different neighbour nodes while reducing the importance of noisy nodes. This is a good way to minimize useless information in the ECG signal data. In detail, for a certain node v of the type pi and its neighbor node v′∈Nv of the type pj, the node-level attention score for node v′ is calculated by using hv, hv′ and the type-level attention weight αpj according to Eq (4.4).
bvv′=σ(νTpj⋅αpj[hv‖hv′]) | (4.4) |
where νpj is the node-level attention vector for the type pj, and it is learned in the process of model training. Then, node-level attention score for each neighbour node is normalized by Eq (4.5).
βvv′=exp(bvv′)∑k∈Nvexp(bvk) | (4.5) |
In the end, the dual-level attention strategy with node-level and type-level attentions is integrated into the heterogeneous graph convolutional network by substituting the propagation rule in Eq (4.6) for that in Eq (4.1).
H(l+1)=σ(∑pi∈PBpi⋅H(l)pi⋅W(l)pi) | (4.6) |
where Bpi denotes the attention matrix wherein every element is βvv′ in Eq (4.5).
The embeddings of nodes in the constructed graph are represented by the L-layer HGAT. So, the multi-lead beat nodes are supplemented by neighbor node information. Finally, multi-lead beat embeddings H(L) are input to the softmax layer for arrhythmia classification, as described by Eq (4.7). The cross-entropy loss with the L2-norm is adopted for model training, as described by Eq (4.8).
Z=softmax(H(L)) | (4.7) |
L=−∑i∈DtrainC∑j=1Yij⋅logZij+η‖Θ‖2 | (4.8) |
where C represents the number of categories, Dtrain is the training set of multi-lead beat data, Y is the category matrix, Θ indicates the parameters of this model and η is the regularization coefficient. At last, the gradient descent algorithm is applied for model parameter optimization.
We focus on multi-lead heartbeat classification. The ECG arrhythmia records used in this study are obtained from the St Petersburg INCART 12-lead arrhythmia database (INCART database) [49], which includes 75 annotated recordings collected from 32 patients under investigation for coronary artery disease. Every recording is 30 minutes long sampled at 257 Hz and consists of 12 standard leads, additionally each beat in the recording contains a beat annotation in the middle of QRS complex. Most features of the ECG signals are centered around the QRS complex. If the heartbeat is sampled over a long time interval, more noise information will be included, alternatively, a relatively short interval will lead to insufficient features. Therefore, 150 samples centered about the middle of the QRS complex are taken as the representation of each single-lead beat, which can cover the features of a QRS complex. To verify the proposed model, 1720 heartbeats from the INCART database with seven detailed categories are selected randomly. The statistics of the dataset are shown in Table 1.
Type | Description | Quantity |
N | Normal beat | 500 |
V | Premature ventricular contraction | 500 |
A | Atrial premature beat | 200 |
F | Fusion of ventricular and normal beat | 200 |
n | Supraventricular escape beat | 30 |
R | Right bundle branch block beat | 200 |
j | Nodal (junctional) escape beat | 90 |
Total | 1720 |
Five-fold cross-validation is used for the experimental analysis. The heartbeats are sampled randomly in the dataset described above. In each experiment, one part is used as test data and the other four parts as training data. After five experiments, five confusion matrices are added together to obtain an overall confusion matrix, which is then used to compute the evaluation metrics in accordance with the corresponding formulas, including the overall accuracy (Ov.Acc), accuracy (Acc), sensitivity (Sen), precision (Ppv), specificity (Spe) and F1-score.
Ov.Acc=n∑i=1(TPr)iM | (5.1) |
Acc=TP+TNTP+FP+TN+FN | (5.2) |
Sen=TPTP+FN | (5.3) |
Ppv=TPTP+FP | (5.4) |
Spe=TNFP+TN | (5.5) |
F1−score=2×Ppv×SenPpv+Sen | (5.6) |
where TP, TN, FP and FN denote the true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative rates, respectively. And, in Eq (5.1), n means the number of arrhythmia categories, (TPr)i means the number of correct predictions in each category, and M means the number of all samples.
Following previous studies, we choose 1, 2, 3 and 12 as respective values of D, which is the number of leads for experimental analysis. The ECG signals from Leads Ⅱ and V1 were found to have clear QRS and T waves, as well as large P waves. P waves can indicate potential changes in the atria and reflect atrial excitation. T waves reflect the depolarization process after ventricular excitation, and they have diagnostic significance. The ECG signals from Lead V5 are distinct with clear QRS waves. The R waves observed for Lead Ⅱ are always larger than the S waves. Lead V1 is dominated by negative waves, and Lead V5 is dominated by the R wave. Information fusion for these three leads can be applied to better detect different contents of QRS wave groups. Thus, the single leads, Lead Ⅱ, V1 and V5, are selected for experimental analysis, and their combination is used for multi-lead ECG classification.
For model training, the hidden dimension of the MADHGAT is set to be 512 and the number of layers is set as 2. The learning rate is set to be 0.003, while the dropout rate is 0.8 and the regularization coefficient η is set to be 5 ×10−8. To avoid overfitting, the L2 regularization method is adopted.
Some baseline methods are described as follows, including the DL-CCANet [50], TL-CCANet [50], RandNet [50], PCANet [51], 1-D ResNet [52] and 1-D CCANet-SVD [52].
1) DL-CCANet is a model for two-lead arrhythmia detection, and TL-CCANet is used for three leads. Their main ideas are the same, and the core lies in the CCANet model, which includes two cascaded convolutional layers for the feature extraction of different leads, as well as an output layer. The difference between TL-CCANet and DL-CCANet is that TL-CCANet has an additional input channel.
2) RandNet is widely used in image learning. It is an unsupervised neural network with compressed inputs for deriving learning representations from compressed data to enable the accommodation of large amounts of data. RandNet was employed to process one-lead ECG signals for heartbeat classification.
3) PCANet uses principal component analysis (PCA), which is a linear subspace projection technique for downsampling high-dimensional datasets and minimizing reprojection errors. By applying PCA filtering for continuous convolution and iteration, the vector representations of the ECG signals were obtained and finally used for heartbeat classification.
4) 1-D ResNet is also widely used in image learning. The model has a deep residual learning framework, which includes residual representations and shortcut connections to solve the degradation problem in a deep learning environment and determine the accuracy gain of arrhythmia detection. Through the use of convolutional layers and residual blocks, two input channels can fuse the information of two leads.
5) 1-D CCANet-SVD is an improved variant of CCANet. For each set of two leads, three types of artificial features including the one-dimensional spectrogram, autoregressive model and time-domain features are applied as the input of CCANet-SVD for neural feature extraction. Then, neural features are fed to an SVM for heartbeat classification.
Single-lead signals are a special case of multi-lead signal. We perform arrhythmia detection for three single-lead signals, i.e., Lead Ⅱ, V1 and V5. Tables 2–4 show their confusion matrices and performance results, which are obtained by applying our model for single-lead experiments. The overall accuracy is determined to be 0.9413, 0.9378 and 0.9378, respectively. Compared with PCANet and RandNet (Table 5), which do not incorporate any handcrafted features, our method improves the overall accuracy for all single leads by about 2% on average. And in the case of Lead V1, we improve the performance by 3% relative to RandNet, which shows that our method takes advantage of single lead data and the heterogeneous graph we constructed works. Since multi-lead beats are composed of their single-lead beats, the relationships between multi-lead beats and their corresponding single-lead beats are useless in the single-lead experiment. However, we still consider the relationship between heartbeats of the same lead as well as the relationship between the lead and the heartbeat, so that the model can still consider the global and local information. In the baseline model, PCANet and RandNet can only consider their own situation in the case of one lead, which reflects the advantages of our model.
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 487 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9645 | 0.9740 | 0.9103 | 0.9607 | 0.9411 |
V | 13 | 477 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9540 | 0.9483 | 0.9787 | 0.9511 |
A | 20 | 1 | 176 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.9814 | 0.8800 | 0.9565 | 0.9947 | 0.9167 |
F | 10 | 17 | 2 | 170 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9738 | 0.8500 | 0.9189 | 0.9901 | 0.8831 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.8667 | 0.9630 | 0.9994 | 0.9123 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9971 | 0.9667 | 0.9775 | 0.9988 | 0.9721 |
Average | 0.9832 | 0.9245 | 0.9528 | 0.9888 | 0.9377 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9413 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 477 | 7 | 4 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0.9657 | 0.9540 | 0.9298 | 0.9705 | 0.9418 |
V | 4 | 483 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9660 | 0.9379 | 0.9738 | 0.9517 |
A | 12 | 2 | 183 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9860 | 0.9150 | 0.9632 | 0.9954 | 0.9385 |
F | 17 | 21 | 1 | 157 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.9610 | 0.7850 | 0.8674 | 0.9842 | 0.8241 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 199 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9950 | 0.9851 | 0.9980 | 0.9901 |
j | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9260 | 0.9402 | 0.9884 | 0.9326 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 488 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9581 | 0.9760 | 0.8905 | 0.9508 | 0.9313 |
V | 11 | 482 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9733 | 0.9640 | 0.9451 | 0.9770 | 0.9545 |
A | 25 | 5 | 169 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9779 | 0.8450 | 0.9602 | 0.9954 | 0.8989 |
F | 15 | 14 | 3 | 168 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9767 | 0.8400 | 0.9545 | 0.9947 | 0.8936 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.9988 | 0.9333 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9655 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 1 | 0.9977 | 0.9800 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9899 |
j | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 0.9930 | 0.9111 | 0.9535 | 0.9975 | 0.9318 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9213 | 0.9577 | 0.9879 | 0.9379 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
PCANet (Ⅱ) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.72% |
PCANet (V1) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 92.10% |
PCANet (V5) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.37% |
RandNet (Ⅱ) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.67% |
RandNet (V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 90.76% |
RandNet (V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.91% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.13% |
MADHGAT (V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
MADHGAT (V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
The experimental results of multi-lead classification will be presented for two-lead, three-lead and 12-lead ECG signal data. Tables 6–8 show the confusion matrices and classification results for the MADHGAT model with two-lead signals. The overall accuracy is found to be 0.9494, 0.9523 and 0.9547, respectively. It is clear that the performance with two-lead signals is better than that with single-lead signals.
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.9727 | 0.9680 | 0.9398 | 0.9746 | 0.9537 |
V | 5 | 488 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9767 | 0.9760 | 0.9457 | 0.9770 | 0.9606 |
A | 13 | 1 | 181 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 5 | 11 | 1 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9797 | 0.9150 | 0.9104 | 0.9882 | 0.9127 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 0.9959 | 0.8333 | 0.9259 | 0.9988 | 0.8772 |
R | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 192 | 0 | 0.9936 | 0.9600 | 0.9846 | 0.9980 | 0.9722 |
j | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 80 | 0.9936 | 0.8889 | 0.9877 | 0.9994 | 0.9357 |
Average | 0.9855 | 0.9209 | 0.9532 | 0.9905 | 0.9360 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9494 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 8 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9698 | 0.9680 | 0.9308 | 0.9705 | 0.9490 |
V | 5 | 486 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9720 | 0.9548 | 0.9811 | 0.9633 |
A | 14 | 2 | 181 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 11 | 9 | 2 | 177 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9773 | 0.8850 | 0.9171 | 0.9895 | 0.9008 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9000 | 0.9643 | 0.9994 | 0.9310 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9977 | 0.9667 | 0.9886 | 0.9994 | 0.9775 |
Average | 0.9864 | 0.9395 | 0.9613 | 0.9909 | 0.9499 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9523 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9750 | 0.9780 | 0.9386 | 0.9738 | 0.9579 |
V | 4 | 489 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9780 | 0.9495 | 0.9787 | 0.9635 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
R | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
j | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9870 | 0.9381 | 0.9595 | 0.9914 | 0.9483 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9547 |
Table 9 shows the confusion matrix and classification results for the MADHGAT model with three-lead signals. The overall accuracy is 0.9552. It can be noticed that the three-lead results are better than the two-lead results. However, we can find that the three-lead experiment yields similar results as the experiment with Leads V1 and V5. In this regard, we think that the key reason is limited sampled heartbeats, which has led slightly different experimental results. Table 10 shows the classification results for the MADHGAT model with 12-lead signals. The overall accuracy is 0.9721. It outperforms the three-lead experiment by almost 2%.
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9756 | 0.9780 | 0.9404 | 0.9746 | 0.9588 |
V | 3 | 490 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.9800 | 0.9496 | 0.9787 | 0.9646 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
j | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9552 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 2 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9820 | 0.9680 | 0.9699 | 0.9877 | 0.9690 |
V | 1 | 496 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9907 | 0.9920 | 0.9764 | 0.9902 | 0.9841 |
A | 8 | 0 | 191 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9890 | 0.9550 | 0.9502 | 0.9934 | 0.9526 |
F | 3 | 6 | 1 | 190 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9901 | 0.9500 | 0.9645 | 0.9954 | 0.9572 |
n | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.9994 | 0.9667 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9831 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 195 | 1 | 0.9965 | 0.9750 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9848 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9920 | 0.9676 | 0.9747 | 0.9949 | 0.9711 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9721 |
Figure 5 integrates our results above, and it can be clearly seen that as we apply more leads, the classification results gradually improved. This is because in the case of multiple leads, the heterogeneous graph we constructed can utilize the associations of leads so that the MADHGAT model can obtain more information on the multi-lead ECG signals to strengthen its learning ability and more accurately assign a multi-lead heartbeat to a certain category. It is proved that our model can consider the correlations between different leads and improve the performance of arrhythmia diagnosis.
Table 11 shows the results of comparing several models with multiple leads. DL-CCANet, TL-CCANet and MADHGAT are end-to-end models without any handcrafted features. The 1-D CCANet-SVD and 1-D ResNet models need handcrafted feature extraction. Our model with 12 leads achieves better performance than the others. Compared with DL-CCANet on the same leads, all three of our two-lead combinations outperform its results by approximately 1.3% on average. In the two-lead Ⅱ and V1, V1 and V5 combinations, the improvement is approximately 1.2% and 1.6%, respectively. Although DL-CCANet considers information fusion for two leads, it joins and reconstructs the signals of two leads separately to obtain features, which are then fed into CCANet to extract the fused features. However, it not only ignores the correlations between single-lead beats for the same lead, but also does not consider the associations between the overall leads and two-lead beats. It shows that our method can better utilize intra-lead and inter-lead correlations.
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.01% |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.07% |
DL-CCANet (V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 93.90% |
TL-CCANet (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 86.25% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 93.60% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o ar) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.12% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o 1D-spec) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.77% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o time-domain feature) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.35% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o stack) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.83% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.70% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.94% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.23% |
MADHGAT (V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.47% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
MADHGAT (12 leads) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 97.21% |
At the same time, the results for Leads Ⅱ and V1 indicate that our model still outperforms several variants of 1-D CCANet-SVD which need some artificial features. For example, 1-D CCANet-SVD without singular value decomposition (SVD) adds time-domain features, autoregressive modeling and a one-dimensional spectrogram, but lacks SVD assistance. Nonetheless, we can still achieve better arrhythmia diagnosis by obtaining information from the leads. In the case of 1-D CCANet-SVD, one-dimensional spectrogram features capture the frequency representation of the signal over time. Autoregressive modeling is applied to capture features that can fit their own time series. Time-domain features take into account the information from the previous heartbeat signal from the same lead, as well as include higher-order centroids and kurtosis. These manual features enable the capture of information about the previous heartbeat, the global frequency domain, etc. All of these features only consider each lead itself. Finally, the CCANet model was utilized to fuse the information of two leads for classification. However, this method aims to mine the content of each lead and heartbeat, missing the associations between different heartbeats of the same lead, as well as the associations between multi-lead heartbeats and single-lead heartbeats. Although 1-D CCANet-SVD achieved 95.70% with all of the handcrafted features, our overall accuracy of 97.21% with 12 leads, which is achieved without any feature extraction, is still higher by 1.51%. We have greatly improved the performance by taking into account inter-lead and intra-lead correlations. The performance of arrhythmia detection can still be excellent without cumbersome handcrafted feature extraction.
Overall, the MADHGAT model achieves the best results among all of the models for all different numbers of leads. Meanwhile, it is obvious that multiple leads are important for arrhythmia detection, as overall detection performance is improved significantly with more leads. This indicates the effectiveness of the proposed MADHGAT model to capture inter-lead and intra-lead information.
For the constructed graph, we have defined three kinds of nodes. In this experiment, we decide to consider the importance of two kinds of nodes: multiple leads and single-lead beats. Three leads, i.e., Leads Ⅱ, V1 and V5 are applied in this experiment with seven categories. We eliminate the nodes of multiple leads and single-lead beats individually and in combination. The results in Table 12 indicate that the full graph with three types of nodes performs better than the graphs with missing nodes, proving the effectiveness of our graph structure.
Graph | Ov.ACC | Avg-Acc | Avg-Sen | Avg-Ppv | Avg-Spe | Avg-F1 |
without multiple leads | 0.9384 | 0.9824 | 0.9152 | 0.9345 | 0.9884 | 0.9243 |
without single-lead beats | 0.8273 | 0.9507 | 0.7660 | 0.8507 | 0.9670 | 0.7975 |
only multi-lead beats | 0.8070 | 0.9449 | 0.7070 | 0.8542 | 0.9623 | 0.7568 |
full graph | 0.9552 | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 |
We can find that the result of removing single-lead beat nodes is a deterioration for every metric relative to the full graph. The most obvious difference is in overall accuracy, which differs by about 13%. This reflects the importance of the relationship between single-lead beats and multi-lead beats, as well as the intra-lead correlations between single-lead beats, which are used to allow the MADHGAT model to capture the contribution of each single-lead beat.
When removing the nodes of multiple leads, relative to the results for the full graph, the overall accuracy is reduced by about 2%. At the same time, it is found that other indicators on average also decrease accordingly. The nodes of multiple leads consider the global information for all heartbeats from a certain lead and transmit the information to the multi-lead heartbeat nodes. Meanwhile, the inter-lead correlations between multiple leads are constructed, improving the performance of arrhythmia detection.
Finally, we remove the nodes of multiple leads and single-lead beats. Only multi-lead beat nodes remain in the heartbeat graph. The final result is the worst because it does not take into account any additional information. Compared to the other cases, it also proves the contributions of the inter-lead and intra-lead correlations.
The proposed MADHGAT model is based on an HGAT, which is transductive and therefore observes all of the data beforehand for classification. To evaluate the performance of MADHGAT with different training set proportions, experiments are conducted using Leads Ⅱ and V1 with different ratios of training data to test data, i.e., 1:2, 1:1, 2:1 and 3:1. The results have been compared with the five-fold results, as shown in Table 13. The experimental results of some baseline methods are also listed.
Ratio of training set to test set | Method | Ov.ACC |
4:1 | DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 94.01% |
4:1 | 1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 93.60% |
4:1 | 1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 86.25% |
4:1 | MADHGAT | 94.94% |
3:1 | MADHGAT | 94.36% |
2:1 | MADHGAT | 94.48% |
1:1 | MADHGAT | 92.38% |
1:2 | MADHGAT | 90.20% |
When the ratio of training set to test set is 1:2, our model is still able to achieve an overall accuracy of 90.20%, which is still better than the ResNet method. Meanwhile, when the ratio is greater than or equal to 2:1, the overall accuracy rate is above 94%. We find that after reducing the number of training sets, our results are still better than some methods. For example, in the case of a 2:1 ratio, our model achieves 94.48% which is higher than that for several methods listed in Table 13. Moreover, 1-D CCANet-SVD needs handcrafted features. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that MADHGAT can still achieve better results when the ratio of training data to test data is decreased. And it shows that our proposed MADHGAT framework can capture effective information, making the model more robust and generalizable.
A novel multi-lead arrhythmia detection model based on an HGAT has been proposed in this paper. Multi-lead ECG signals are modeled as a heterogeneous graph to integrate rich information. Additionally, intra-lead and inter-lead correlations are constructed to capture intricate interactions among multi-lead signals. This work provides a reasonable and effective data model that utilizes a heterogeneous graph neural network with dual-level attention strategy to quantify the contributions of different types of information, thereby improving detection performance. At the same time, our model does not require any feature extraction process for ECG signal analysis, which avoids complex feature engineering.
Though the proposed model performs excellently for automatic arrhythmia detection, it is transductive. An extremely massive amount of memory is needed for the training process. In light of this problem, in the future, we will focus on developing an inductive learning model based on a graph neural network that can handle more data.
This work is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2021A1515012290), Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Cyber-Physical Systems (No. 2020B1212060069) and National & Local Joint Engineering Research Center of Intelligent Manufacturing Cyber-Physical Systems.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
[1] |
Dooley K, Zon LI (2000) Zebrafish: a model system for the study of human disease. Curr Opin Genet Dev 10: 252-256. doi: 10.1016/S0959-437X(00)00074-5
![]() |
[2] | Goldsmith JR, Jobin C (2012) Think Small: Zebrafish as a Model System of Human Pathology. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012: 817341. |
[3] |
Lieschke GJ, Currie PD (2007) Animal models of human disease: zebrafish swim into view. Nat Rev Genet 8: 353-367. doi: 10.1038/nrg2091
![]() |
[4] |
Mandrekar N, Thakur NL (2009) Significance of the zebrafish model in the discovery of bioactive molecules from nature. Biotechnol Lett 31: 171-179. doi: 10.1007/s10529-008-9868-1
![]() |
[5] |
Zon LI, Peterson RT (2005) In vivo drug discovery in the zebrafish. Nat Rev Drug Discov 4: 35-44. doi: 10.1038/nrd1606
![]() |
[6] |
Skakkebaek NE, Jorgensen N, Main KM, et al. (2006) Is human fecundity declining? Int J Androl 29: 2-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2005.00573.x
![]() |
[7] |
Dumesic DA, Abbott DH, Padmanabhan V (2007) Polycystic ovary syndrome and its developmental origins. Rev Endocr Metab Disord 8: 127-141. doi: 10.1007/s11154-007-9046-0
![]() |
[8] | van der Zwan YG, Biermann K, Wolffenbuttel KP, et al. (2014) Gonadal Maldevelopment as Risk Factor for Germ Cell Cancer: Towards a Clinical Decision Model. Eur Urol 67: 692-701. |
[9] |
Wilhelm D, Palmer S, Koopman P (2007) Sex determination and gonadal development in mammals. Physiol Rev 87: 1-28. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00009.2006
![]() |
[10] |
Angelopoulou R, Lavranos G, Manolakou P (2012) Sex determination strategies in 2012: towards a common regulatory model? Reprod Biol Endocrinol 10: 13. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-10-13
![]() |
[11] | Devlin RH, Nagahama Y (2002) Sex determination and sex differentiation in fish: an overview of genetic, physiological, and environmental influences. Aquaculture 208: 191-364. |
[12] |
Liew WC, Bartfai R, Lim Z, et al. (2012) Polygenic sex determination system in zebrafish. PLoS One 7: e34397. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034397
![]() |
[13] | Liew WC, Orban L (2013) Zebrafish sex: a complicated affair. Brief Funct Genom 13: 172-187. |
[14] |
Ser JR, Roberts RB, Kocher TD (2010) Multiple interacting loci control sex determination in lake Malawi cichlid fish. Evolution 64: 486-501. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00871.x
![]() |
[15] | Vandeputte M, Dupont-Nivet M, Chavanne H, et al. (2007) A polygenic hypothesis for sex determination in the European sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax. Genetics 176: 1049-1057. |
[16] |
Matsuda M, Nagahama Y, Shinomiya A, et al. (2002) DMY is a Y-specific DM-domain gene required for male development in the medaka fish. Nature 417: 559-563. doi: 10.1038/nature751
![]() |
[17] |
Barske LA, Capel B (2008) Blurring the edges in vertebrate sex determination. Curr Opin Genet Dev 18: 499-505. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2008.11.004
![]() |
[18] |
Sato E, Endo T, Yamahira K, et al. (2005) Induction of female-to-male sex reversal by high temperature treatment in Medaka, Oryzias latipes. Zoolog Sci 22: 985-988. doi: 10.2108/zsj.22.985
![]() |
[19] |
Ospina-Alvarez N, Piferrer F (2008) Temperature-dependent sex determination in fish revisited: prevalence, a single sex ratio response pattern, and possible effects of climate change. PLoS One 3: e2837. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002837
![]() |
[20] | Takahashi H (1977) Juvenile Hermaphroditism in the Zebrafish, Brachydanio rerio. Bull Fac Fish Hokkaido Univ 28: 57-65. |
[21] |
Wang XG, Bartfai R, Sleptsova-Freidrich I, et al. (2007) The timing and extent of 'juvenile ovary' phase are highly variable during zebrafish testis differentiation. J Fish Biol 70: 33-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01363.x
![]() |
[22] |
Siegfried KR, Nusslein-Volhard C (2008) Germ line control of female sex determination in zebrafish. Dev Biol 324: 277-287. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2008.09.025
![]() |
[23] |
Luzio A, Monteiro SM, Garcia-Santos S, et al. (2015) Zebrafish sex differentiation and gonad development after exposure to 17alpha-ethinylestradiol, fadrozole and their binary mixture: A stereological study. Aquat Toxicol 166: 83-95. doi: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2015.07.015
![]() |
[24] | Uchida D, Yamashita M, Kitano T, et al. (2002) Oocyte apoptosis during the transition from ovary-like tissue to testes during sex differentiation of juvenile zebrafish. J Exp Biol 205: 711-718. |
[25] |
Pradhan A, Khalaf H, Ochsner SA, et al. (2012) Activation of NF-kappaB protein prevents the transition from juvenile ovary to testis and promotes ovarian development in zebrafish. J Biol Chem 287: 37926-37938. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.386284
![]() |
[26] |
Sola L, Gornung E (2001) Classical and molecular cytogenetics of the zebrafish, Danio rerio (Cyprinidae, Cypriniformes): an overview. Genetica 111: 397-412. doi: 10.1023/A:1013776323077
![]() |
[27] |
Wallace B-M, Wallace H (2003) Synaptonemal complex karyotype of zebrafish. Heredity 90: 136-140. doi: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800184
![]() |
[28] |
Traut W, Winking H (2001) Meiotic chromosomes and stages of sex chromosome evolution in fish: zebrafish, platypus and guppy. Chromosome Res 9: 659-672. doi: 10.1023/A:1012956324417
![]() |
[29] |
Phillips RB, Reed KM (2000) Localization of repetitive DNAs to zebrafish (Danio rerio) chromosomes by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Chromosome Res 8: 27-35. doi: 10.1023/A:1009271017998
![]() |
[30] | Singer A, Perlman H, Yan Y, et al. (2002) Sex-specific recombination rates in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Genetics 160: 649-657. |
[31] |
Tong SK, Hsu HJ, Chung BC (2010) Zebrafish monosex population reveals female dominance in sex determination and earliest events of gonad differentiation. Dev Biol 344: 849-856. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2010.05.515
![]() |
[32] | Sharma KK, Sharma OP, Tripathi NK (1998) Female heterogamety in Danio rerio (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae). Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect B 68: 123-126. |
[33] |
Wilson CA, High SK, McCluskey BM, et al. (2014) Wild sex in zebrafish: loss of the natural sex determinant in domesticated strains. Genetics 198: 1291-1308. doi: 10.1534/genetics.114.169284
![]() |
[34] |
Shang EH, Yu RM, Wu RS (2006) Hypoxia affects sex differentiation and development, leading to a male-dominated population in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Environ Sci Technol 40: 3118-3122. doi: 10.1021/es0522579
![]() |
[35] |
Villamizar N, Ribas L, Piferrer F, et al. (2012) Impact of daily thermocycles on hatching rhythms, larval performance and sex differentiation of zebrafish. PLoS One 7: e52153. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052153
![]() |
[36] |
Luzio A, Santos D, Fontainhas-Fernandes AA, et al. (2016) Effects of 17alpha-ethinylestradiol at different water temperatures on zebrafish sex differentiation and gonad development. Aquat Toxicol 174: 22-35. doi: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2016.02.003
![]() |
[37] |
Bradley KM, Breyer JP, Melville DB, et al. (2011) An SNP-based linkage map for zebrafish reveals sex determination loci. G3 (Bethesda) 1: 3-9. doi: 10.1534/g3.111.000190
![]() |
[38] |
Anderson JL, Rodriguez Mari A, Braasch I, et al. (2012) Multiple sex-associated regions and a putative sex chromosome in zebrafish revealed by RAD mapping and population genomics. PLoS One 7: e40701. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040701
![]() |
[39] |
Mishima Y, Giraldez AJ, Takeda Y, et al. (2006) Differential regulation of germline mRNAs in soma and germ cells by zebrafish miR-430. Curr Biol 16: 2135-2142. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.08.086
![]() |
[40] |
Staton AA, Knaut H, Giraldez AJ (2011) miRNA regulation of Sdf1 chemokine signaling provides genetic robustness to germ cell migration. Nat Genet 43: 204-211. doi: 10.1038/ng.758
![]() |
[41] |
von Hofsten J, Olsson PE (2005) Zebrafish sex determination and differentiation: involvement of FTZ-F1 genes. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 3: 63. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-3-63
![]() |
[42] |
Orban L, Sreenivasan R, Olsson PE (2009) Long and winding roads: testis differentiation in zebrafish. Mol Cell Endocrinol 312: 35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.mce.2009.04.014
![]() |
[43] | Rodriguez-Mari A, Yan YL, Bremiller RA, et al. (2005) Characterization and expression pattern of zebrafish Anti-Mullerian hormone (Amh) relative to sox9a, sox9b, and cyp19a1a, during gonad development. Gene Expr Patterns 5: 655-667. |
[44] |
Luzio A, Coimbra AM, Benito C, et al. (2015) Screening and identification of potential sex-associated sequences in Danio rerio. Mol Reprod Dev 82: 756-764. doi: 10.1002/mrd.22508
![]() |
[45] |
Sim H, Argentaro A, Harley VR (2008) Boys, girls and shuttling of SRY and SOX9. Trends Endocrinol Metab 19: 213-222. doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2008.04.002
![]() |
[46] |
Biason-Lauber A (2010) Control of sex development. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 24: 163-186. doi: 10.1016/j.beem.2009.12.002
![]() |
[47] |
Koopman P (2005) Sex determination: a tale of two Sox genes. Trends Genet 21: 367-370. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2005.05.006
![]() |
[48] |
Sekido R, Lovell-Badge R (2009) Sex determination and SRY: down to a wink and a nudge? Trends Genet 25: 19-29. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2008.10.008
![]() |
[49] |
Ross AJ, Capel B (2005) Signaling at the crossroads of gonad development. Trends Endocrinol Metab 16: 19-25. doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2004.11.004
![]() |
[50] |
Jakob S, Lovell-Badge R (2011) Sex determination and the control of Sox9 expression in mammals. FEBS J 278: 1002-1009. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2011.08029.x
![]() |
[51] |
Kocer A, Reichmann J, Best D, et al. (2009) Germ cell sex determination in mammals. Mol Hum Reprod 15: 205-213. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gap008
![]() |
[52] |
Sreenivasan R, Cai M, Bartfai R, et al. (2008) Transcriptomic analyses reveal novel genes with sexually dimorphic expression in the zebrafish gonad and brain. PLoS One 3: e1791. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001791
![]() |
[53] |
Jorgensen A, Morthorst JE, Andersen O, et al. (2008) Expression profiles for six zebrafish genes during gonadal sex differentiation. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 6: 25. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-6-25
![]() |
[54] |
Bowles J, Feng CW, Spiller C, et al. (2010) FGF9 suppresses meiosis and promotes male germ cell fate in mice. Dev Cell 19: 440-449. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2010.08.010
![]() |
[55] |
Jameson SA, Lin YT, Capel B (2012) Testis development requires the repression of Wnt4 by Fgf signaling. Dev Biol 370: 24-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2012.06.009
![]() |
[56] |
Colvin JS, Green RP, Schmahl J, et al. (2001) Male-to-female sex reversal in mice lacking fibroblast growth factor 9. Cell 104: 875-889. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00284-7
![]() |
[57] |
Lasala C, Carre-Eusebe D, Picard JY, et al. (2004) Subcellular and molecular mechanisms regulating anti-Mullerian hormone gene expression in mammalian and nonmammalian species. DNA Cell Biol 23: 572-585. doi: 10.1089/dna.2004.23.572
![]() |
[58] |
Lourenco D, Brauner R, Rybczynska M, et al. (2011) Loss-of-function mutation in GATA4 causes anomalies of human testicular development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108: 1597-1602. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1010257108
![]() |
[59] |
Miyamoto Y, Taniguchi H, Hamel F, et al. (2008) A GATA4/WT1 cooperation regulates transcription of genes required for mammalian sex determination and differentiation. BMC Mol Biol 9: 44. doi: 10.1186/1471-2199-9-44
![]() |
[60] |
Hattori RS, Murai Y, Oura M, et al. (2012) A Y-linked anti-Mullerian hormone duplication takes over a critical role in sex determination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 2955-2959. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1018392109
![]() |
[61] |
Wang XG, Orban L (2007) Anti-Mullerian hormone and 11 beta-hydroxylase show reciprocal expression to that of aromatase in the transforming gonad of zebrafish males. Dev Dyn 236: 1329-1338. doi: 10.1002/dvdy.21129
![]() |
[62] |
Kluver N, Pfennig F, Pala I, et al. (2007) Differential expression of anti-Mullerian hormone (amh) and anti-Mullerian hormone receptor type II (amhrII) in the teleost medaka. Dev Dyn 236: 271-281. doi: 10.1002/dvdy.20997
![]() |
[63] | Kamiya T, Kai W, Tasumi S, et al. (2012) A Trans-Species Missense SNP in Amhr2 Is Associated with Sex Determination in the Tiger Pufferfish, Takifugu rubripes (Fugu). PLoS Genet 8: e1002798. |
[64] |
Pradhan A, Olsson PE (2014) Juvenile Ovary to Testis Transition in Zebrafish Involves Inhibition of Ptges. Biol Reprod 91: 33. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.114.119016
![]() |
[65] | Sreenivasan R, Jiang J, Wang X, et al. (2013) Gonad Differentiation in Zebrafish Is Regulated by the Canonical Wnt Signaling Pathway. Biol Reprod 90: 45. |
[66] |
Kazanskaya O, Glinka A, del Barco Barrantes I, et al. (2004) R-Spondin2 is a secreted activator of Wnt/beta-catenin signaling and is required for Xenopus myogenesis. Dev Cell 7: 525-534. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2004.07.019
![]() |
[67] |
Jin YR, Yoon JK (2012) The R-spondin family of proteins: emerging regulators of WNT signaling. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 44: 2278-2287. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2012.09.006
![]() |
[68] |
Zhang Y, Li F, Sun D, et al. (2011) Molecular analysis shows differential expression of R-spondin1 in zebrafish (Danio rerio) gonads. Mol Biol Rep 38: 275-282. doi: 10.1007/s11033-010-0105-3
![]() |
[69] |
Smith CA, Shoemaker CM, Roeszler KN, et al. (2008) Cloning and expression of R-Spondin1 in different vertebrates suggests a conserved role in ovarian development. BMC Dev Biol 8: 72. doi: 10.1186/1471-213X-8-72
![]() |
[70] |
Yoon JK, Lee JS (2012) Cellular signaling and biological functions of R-spondins. Cell Signal 24: 369-377. doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2011.09.023
![]() |
[71] |
Eisinger AL, Nadauld LD, Shelton DN, et al. (2007) Retinoic acid inhibits beta-catenin through suppression of Cox-2: a role for truncated adenomatous polyposis coli. J Biol Chem 282: 29394-29400. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M609768200
![]() |
[72] |
Goessling W, North TE, Loewer S, et al. (2009) Genetic interaction of PGE2 and Wnt signaling regulates developmental specification of stem cells and regeneration. Cell 136: 1136-1147. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2009.01.015
![]() |
[73] |
Pannetier M, Fabre S, Batista F, et al. (2006) FOXL2 activates P450 aromatase gene transcription: towards a better characterization of the early steps of mammalian ovarian development. J Mol Endocrinol 36: 399-413. doi: 10.1677/jme.1.01947
![]() |
[74] |
Fleming NI, Knower KC, Lazarus KA, et al. (2010) Aromatase Is a Direct Target of FOXL2: C134W in Granulosa Cell Tumors via a Single Highly Conserved Binding Site in the Ovarian Specific Promoter. PLoS One 5: e14389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014389
![]() |
[75] |
Nef S, Vassalli JD (2009) Complementary pathways in mammalian female sex determination. J Biol 8: 74. doi: 10.1186/jbiol173
![]() |
[76] |
Guiguen Y, Fostier A, Piferrer F, et al. (2010) Ovarian aromatase and estrogens: a pivotal role for gonadal sex differentiation and sex change in fish. Gen Comp Endocrinol 165: 352-366. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2009.03.002
![]() |
[77] |
Fenske M, Segner H (2004) Aromatase modulation alters gonadal differentiation in developing zebrafish (Danio rerio). Aquat Toxicol 67: 105-126. doi: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2003.10.008
![]() |
[78] | Takatsu K, Miyaoku K, Roy SR, et al. (2013) Induction of female-to-male sex change in adult zebrafish by aromatase inhibitor treatment. Sci Rep 3: 3400. |
[79] |
Brion F, Tyler CR, Palazzi X, et al. (2004) Impacts of 17beta-estradiol, including environmentally relevant concentrations, on reproduction after exposure during embryo-larval-, juvenile- and adult-life stages in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Aquat Toxicol 68: 193-217. doi: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2004.01.022
![]() |
[80] |
Orn S, Holbech H, Norrgren L (2016) Sexual disruption in zebrafish (Danio rerio) exposed to mixtures of 17alpha-ethinylestradiol and 17beta-trenbolone. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 41: 225-231. doi: 10.1016/j.etap.2015.12.010
![]() |
[81] | Schulz RW, Bogerd J, Male R, et al. (2007) Estrogen-induced alterations in amh and dmrt1 expression signal for disruption in male sexual development in the zebrafish. Environ Sci Technol 41: 6305-6310. |
[82] |
Reyhanian Caspillo N, Volkova K, Hallgren S, et al. (2014) Short-term treatment of adult male zebrafish (Danio Rerio) with 17alpha-ethinyl estradiol affects the transcription of genes involved in development and male sex differentiation. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 164: 35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpc.2014.04.003
![]() |
[83] |
Lor Y, Revak A, Weigand J, et al. (2015) Juvenile exposure to vinclozolin shifts sex ratios and impairs reproductive capacity of zebrafish. Reprod Toxicol 58: 111-118. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2015.09.003
![]() |
[84] |
Baumann L, Knorr S, Keiter S, et al. (2014) Persistence of endocrine disruption in zebrafish (Danio rerio) after discontinued exposure to the androgen 17beta-trenbolone. Environ Toxicol Chem 33: 2488-2496. doi: 10.1002/etc.2698
![]() |
[85] |
Mukhi S, Torres L, Patino R (2007) Effects of larval-juvenile treatment with perchlorate and co-treatment with thyroxine on zebrafish sex ratios. Gen Comp Endocrinol 150: 486-494. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2006.11.013
![]() |
[86] |
Sharma P, Tang S, Mayer GD, et al. (2016) Effects of thyroid endocrine manipulation on sex-related gene expression and population sex ratios in Zebrafish. Gen Comp Endocrinol 235: 38-47. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2016.05.028
![]() |
[87] |
Sharma P, Patino R (2013) Regulation of gonadal sex ratios and pubertal development by the thyroid endocrine system in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Gen Comp Endocrinol 184: 111-119. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2012.12.018
![]() |
[88] |
Aggarwal BB, Sethi G, Nair A, et al. (2006) Nuclear factor- κB: A holy grail in cancer prevention and therapy. Curr Signal Transduct Ther 1: 25-52. doi: 10.2174/157436206775269235
![]() |
[89] |
Li X, Stark GR (2002) NF-κB-dependent signaling pathways. Exp Hematol 30: 285-296. doi: 10.1016/S0301-472X(02)00777-4
![]() |
[90] |
Ghosh S, May MM, Kopp EB (1998) NF-κB and Rel proteins: evolutionarily conserved mediators of immune responses. Annu Rev Immunol 16: 225-260. doi: 10.1146/annurev.immunol.16.1.225
![]() |
[91] | Siebenlist U, Franzoso G, Brown K (1994) Structure, regulation and function of NF-κB. Annu Rev Cell Biol 10: 405-455. |
[92] | Xiao W (2004) Advances in NF-kappaB signaling transduction and transcription. Cell Mol Immunol 1: 425-435. |
[93] |
Beg AA, Baldwin AS (1993) The I kappa B proteins: multifunctional regulators of Rel/NF-kappa B transcription factors. Genes Dev 7: 2064-2070. doi: 10.1101/gad.7.11.2064
![]() |
[94] | Ghosh S, Karin M (2002) Missing pieces in the NFkB puzzle. Cell Metab 109: 81-96. |
[95] |
Beg AA, Finco TS, Nantermet PV, et al. (1993) Tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-1 lead to phosphorylation and loss of I kappa B alpha: a mechanism for NF-kappa B activation. Mol Cell Biol 13: 3301-3310. doi: 10.1128/MCB.13.6.3301
![]() |
[96] |
Finco TS, Beg AA, Baldwin AS Jr (1994) Inducible phosphorylation of I kappa B alpha is not sufficient for its dissociation from NF-kappa B and is inhibited by protease inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91: 11884-11888. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.25.11884
![]() |
[97] |
Shishodia S, Aggarwal BB (2002) Nuclear factor-κB activation: A question of life or death. J Biochem Mol Biol 35: 28-40. doi: 10.5483/BMBRep.2002.35.1.028
![]() |
[98] |
Rao NA, McCalman MT, Moulos P, et al. (2011) Coactivation of GR and NFKB alters the repertoire of their binding sites and target genes. Genome Res 21: 1404-1416. doi: 10.1101/gr.118042.110
![]() |
[99] | Palvimo JJ, Reinikainen P, Ikonen T, et al. (1996) Mutual transcriptional interference between RelA and androgen receptor. J Biol Chem 271: 24151–24156. |
[100] |
McKay LI, Cidlowski JA (1998) Cross-talk between Nuclear factor-kB and the steroid hormone receptors: Mechanisms of mutual antagonism. Mol Endocrinol 12: 45-56. doi: 10.1210/mend.12.1.0044
![]() |
[101] | Delfino F, Walker WH (1998) Stage-specific nuclear expression of NF-κB in mammalian testis. Mol Endocrinol 12: 1696-1707. |
[102] |
Hong CY, Park JH, Seo KH, et al. (2003) Expression of MIS in the Testis Is Downregulated by Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha through the Negative Regulation of SF-1 Transactivation by NF-κB. Mol Cell Biol 23: 6000-6012. doi: 10.1128/MCB.23.17.6000-6012.2003
![]() |
[103] | Sobolewski C, Cerella C, Dicato M, et al. (2010) The role of cyclooxygenase-2 in cell proliferation and cell death in human malignancies. Int J Cell Biol 2010: 215158. |
[104] |
Simmons DL, Botting RM, Hla T (2004) Cyclooxygenase isozymes: the biology of prostaglandin synthesis and inhibition. Pharmacol Rev 56: 387-437. doi: 10.1124/pr.56.3.3
![]() |
[105] |
Kang YJ, Mbonye UR, DeLong CJ, et al. (2007) Regulation of intracellular cyclooxygenase levels by gene transcription and protein degradation. Prog Lipid Res 46: 108-125. doi: 10.1016/j.plipres.2007.01.001
![]() |
[106] |
Morita I (2002) Distinct functions of COX-1 and COX-2. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat 68-69: 165-175. doi: 10.1016/S0090-6980(02)00029-1
![]() |
[107] | Tanabe T, Tohnai N (2002) Cyclooxygenase isozymes and their gene structures and expression. 68-69: 95-114. |
[108] |
Klein T, Shephard P, Kleinert H, et al. (2007) Regulation of cyclooxygenase-2 expression by cyclic AMP. Biochim Biophys Acta 1773: 1605-1618. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2007.09.001
![]() |
[109] |
Schmedtje JF, Ji YS, Liu RN, et al. (1997) Hypoxia induces cyclooxygenase-2 via the NF-kB p65 transcription factor in human vascular endothelial cells. J Biol Chem 272: 601-608. doi: 10.1074/jbc.272.1.601
![]() |
[110] |
Tsatsanis C, Androulidaki A, Venihaki M, et al. (2006) Signalling networks regulating cyclooxygenase-2. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 38: 1654-1661. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2006.03.021
![]() |
[111] |
Poligone B, Baldwin AS (2001) Positive and negative regulation of NF-kappaB by COX-2: roles of different prostaglandins. J Biol Chem 276: 38658-38664. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M106599200
![]() |
[112] |
Grosser T, Yusuff S, Cheskis E, et al. (2002) Developmental expression of functional cyclooxygenases in zebrafish. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99: 8418-8423. doi: 10.1073/pnas.112217799
![]() |
[113] | Adams IR, McLaren A (2002) Sexually dimorphic devlopment of mouse primordial germ cells: switch from oogenesis to spermatogenesis. Development 129: 1155-1164. |
[114] |
Wilhelm D, Hiramatsu R, Mizusaki H, et al. (2007) SOX9 regulates prostaglandin D synthase gene transcription in vivo to ensure testis development. J Biol Chem 282: 10553-10560. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M609578200
![]() |
[115] |
Breyer RM, Bagdassarian CK, Myers SA, et al. (2001) Prostanoid receptors: subtypes and signaling. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 41: 661-690. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.41.1.661
![]() |
[116] |
Cai Z, Kwintkiewicz J, Young ME, et al. (2007) Prostaglandin E2 increases Cyp19 expression in Rat Granulosa Cells: Implication of GATA-4. Mol Cell Endocrinol 263: 181-189. doi: 10.1016/j.mce.2006.09.012
![]() |
[117] |
Guan Y, Zhang Y, Schneider A, et al. (2001) Urogenital distribution of a mouse membrane-associated prostaglandin E2 synthase. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 281: 1173-1177. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.0116.2001
![]() |
[118] |
Sun T, Deng WB, Diao HL, et al. (2006) Differential expression and regulation of prostaglandin E synthases in the mouse ovary during sexual maturation and luteal development. J Endocrinol 189: 89-101. doi: 10.1677/joe.1.06147
![]() |
[119] |
Bayne RA, Eddie SL, Collins CS, et al. (2009) Prostaglandin E2 as a regulator of germ cells during ovarian development. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94: 4053-4060. doi: 10.1210/jc.2009-0755
![]() |
[120] |
Takahashi T, Morrow JD, Wang H, et al. (2006) Cyclooxygenase-2-derived prostaglandin E(2) directs oocyte maturation by differentially influencing multiple signaling pathways. J Biol Chem 281: 37117-37129. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M608202200
![]() |
[121] |
Mank JE, Promislow DEL, Avise JC (2006) Evolution of alternative sex-determining mechanisms in teleost fishes. Biol J Linn Soc 87: 83-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2006.00558.x
![]() |
[122] |
Slanchev K, Stebler J, de la Cueva-Mendez G, et al. (2005) Development without germ cells: the role of the germ line in zebrafish sex differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 4074-4079. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0407475102
![]() |
[123] |
Kurokawa H, Saito D, Nakamura S, et al. (2007) Germ cells are essential for sexual dimorphism in the medaka gonad. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104: 16958-16963. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0609932104
![]() |
[124] | Tzung KW, Goto R, Saju JM, et al. (2014) Early Depletion of Primordial Germ Cells in Zebrafish Promotes Testis Formation. Stem Cell Rep 4: 61-73. |
[125] |
McLaren A (2003) Primordial germ cells in the mouse. Dev Biol 262: 1-15. doi: 10.1016/S0012-1606(03)00214-8
![]() |
[126] | DiNapoli L, Capel B (2007) Germ cell depletion does not alter the morphogenesis of the fetal testis or ovary in the red-eared slider turtle (Trachemys scripta). J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol 308: 236-241. |
[127] |
Goto R, Saito T, Takeda T, et al. (2012) Germ cells are not the primary factor for sexual fate determination in goldfish. Dev Biol 370: 98-109. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2012.07.010
![]() |
[128] |
Fujimoto T, Nishimura T, Goto-Kazeto R, et al. (2010) Sexual dimorphism of gonadal structure and gene expression in germ cell-deficient loach, a teleost fish. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107: 17211-17216. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1007032107
![]() |
[129] |
Petersen AM, Earp NC, Redmond ME, et al. (2016) Perchlorate Exposure Reduces Primordial Germ Cell Number in Female Threespine Stickleback. PLoS One 11: e0157792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157792
![]() |
[130] |
Dranow DB, Tucker RP, Draper BW (2013) Germ cells are required to maintain a stable sexual phenotype in adult zebrafish. Dev Biol 376: 43-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.01.016
![]() |
[131] |
Rodriguez-Mari A, Canestro C, Bremiller RA, et al. (2010) Sex reversal in zebrafish fancl mutants is caused by Tp53-mediated germ cell apoptosis. PLoS Genet 6: e1001034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1001034
![]() |
[132] |
Rios-Rojas C, Bowles J, Koopman P (2015) On the role of germ cells in mammalian gonad development: quiet passengers or back-seat drivers? Reproduction 149: R181-191. doi: 10.1530/REP-14-0663
![]() |
[133] |
Behringer RR, Cate RL, Froelick GJ, et al. (1990) Abnormal sexual development in transgenic mice chronically expressing mullerian inhibiting substance. Nature 345: 167-170. doi: 10.1038/345167a0
![]() |
[134] |
Couse JF, Hewitt SC, Bunch DO, et al. (1999) Postnatal sex reversal of the ovaries in mice lacking estrogen receptors alpha and beta. Science 286: 2328-2331. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5448.2328
![]() |
[135] |
Maatouk DM, Mork L, Hinson A, et al. (2012) Germ cells are not required to establish the female pathway in mouse fetal gonads. PLoS One 7: e47238. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047238
![]() |
[136] |
Molyneaux K, Wylie C (2004) Primordial germ cell migration. Int J Dev Biol 48: 537-544. doi: 10.1387/ijdb.041833km
![]() |
[137] | Saitou M, Yamaji M (2012) Primordial germ cells in mice. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 4: 59-66. |
[138] |
Kashimada K, Svingen T, Feng CW, et al. (2011) Antagonistic regulation of Cyp26b1 by transcription factors SOX9/SF1 and FOXL2 during gonadal development in mice. FASEB J 25: 3561-3569. doi: 10.1096/fj.11-184333
![]() |
[139] |
Bowles J, Knight D, Smith C, et al. (2006) Retinoid signaling determines germ cell fate in mice. Science 312: 596-600. doi: 10.1126/science.1125691
![]() |
[140] |
Koubova J, Menke DB, Zhou Q, et al. (2006) Retinoic acid regulates sex-specific timing of meiotic initiation in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 2474-2479. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510813103
![]() |
[141] |
Moniot B, Ujjan S, Champagne J, et al. (2014) Prostaglandin D2 acts through the Dp2 receptor to influence male germ cell differentiation in the foetal mouse testis. Development 141: 3561-3571. doi: 10.1242/dev.103408
![]() |
[142] |
Kipp JL, Golebiowski A, Rodriguez G, et al. (2011) Gene expression profiling reveals Cyp26b1 to be an activin regulated gene involved in ovarian granulosa cell proliferation. Endocrinology 152: 303-312. doi: 10.1210/en.2010-0749
![]() |
[143] |
Pradhan A, Olsson PE (2015) Inhibition of retinoic acid synthesis disrupts spermatogenesis and fecundity in zebrafish. Gen Comp Endocrinol 217-218: 81-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2015.02.002
![]() |
[144] |
Alsop D, Matsumoto J, Brown S, et al. (2008) Retinoid requirements in the reproduction of zebrafish. Gen Comp Endocrinol 156: 51-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2007.11.008
![]() |
[145] |
Rodriguez-Mari A, Canestro C, BreMiller RA, et al. (2013) Retinoic acid metabolic genes, meiosis, and gonadal sex differentiation in zebrafish. PLoS One 8: e73951. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073951
![]() |
[146] |
Azziz R, Marin C, Hoq L, et al. (2005) Health care-related economic burden of the polycystic ovary syndrome during the reproductive life span. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 90: 4650-4658. doi: 10.1210/jc.2005-0628
![]() |
[147] |
Agrawal R, Sharma S, Bekir J, et al. (2004) Prevalence of polycystic ovaries and polycystic ovary syndrome in lesbian women compared with heterosexual women. Fertil Steril 82: 1352-1357. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.04.041
![]() |
[148] |
Abbott DH, Barnett DK, Bruns CM, et al. (2005) Androgen excess fetal programming of female reproduction: a developmental aetiology for polycystic ovary syndrome? Hum Reprod Update 11: 357-374. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmi013
![]() |
[149] |
Skakkebaek NE, Rajpert-De Meyts E, Main KM (2001) Testicular dysgenesis syndrome: an increasingly common developmental disorder with environmental aspects. Hum Reprod 16: 972-978. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.5.972
![]() |
[150] |
Juul A, Almstrup K, Andersson AM, et al. (2014) Possible fetal determinants of male infertility. Nat Rev Endocrinol 10: 553-562. doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2014.97
![]() |
1. | Jiayu Fu, Haiyan Wang, Risu Na, A JISAIHAN, Zhixiong Wang, Yuko OHNO, Recent advancements in digital health management using multi-modal signal monitoring, 2023, 20, 1551-0018, 5194, 10.3934/mbe.2023241 | |
2. | Qing Lin, Dino Oglić, Hak-Keung Lam, Michael J. Curtis, Zoran Cvetkovic, 2024, A Hybrid GCN-LSTM Model for Ventricular Arrhythmia Classification Based on ECG Pattern Similarity, 979-8-3503-7149-9, 1, 10.1109/EMBC53108.2024.10781976 | |
3. | Tuan Hoang Vu, Anh Nguyen, Minh Tuan Nguyen, 2024, Graph Attention Networks Based Cardiac Arrest Diagnosis, 979-8-3503-5398-3, 762, 10.1109/ATC63255.2024.10908172 |
Type | Description | Quantity |
N | Normal beat | 500 |
V | Premature ventricular contraction | 500 |
A | Atrial premature beat | 200 |
F | Fusion of ventricular and normal beat | 200 |
n | Supraventricular escape beat | 30 |
R | Right bundle branch block beat | 200 |
j | Nodal (junctional) escape beat | 90 |
Total | 1720 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 487 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9645 | 0.9740 | 0.9103 | 0.9607 | 0.9411 |
V | 13 | 477 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9540 | 0.9483 | 0.9787 | 0.9511 |
A | 20 | 1 | 176 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.9814 | 0.8800 | 0.9565 | 0.9947 | 0.9167 |
F | 10 | 17 | 2 | 170 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9738 | 0.8500 | 0.9189 | 0.9901 | 0.8831 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.8667 | 0.9630 | 0.9994 | 0.9123 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9971 | 0.9667 | 0.9775 | 0.9988 | 0.9721 |
Average | 0.9832 | 0.9245 | 0.9528 | 0.9888 | 0.9377 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9413 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 477 | 7 | 4 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0.9657 | 0.9540 | 0.9298 | 0.9705 | 0.9418 |
V | 4 | 483 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9660 | 0.9379 | 0.9738 | 0.9517 |
A | 12 | 2 | 183 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9860 | 0.9150 | 0.9632 | 0.9954 | 0.9385 |
F | 17 | 21 | 1 | 157 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.9610 | 0.7850 | 0.8674 | 0.9842 | 0.8241 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 199 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9950 | 0.9851 | 0.9980 | 0.9901 |
j | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9260 | 0.9402 | 0.9884 | 0.9326 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 488 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9581 | 0.9760 | 0.8905 | 0.9508 | 0.9313 |
V | 11 | 482 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9733 | 0.9640 | 0.9451 | 0.9770 | 0.9545 |
A | 25 | 5 | 169 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9779 | 0.8450 | 0.9602 | 0.9954 | 0.8989 |
F | 15 | 14 | 3 | 168 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9767 | 0.8400 | 0.9545 | 0.9947 | 0.8936 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.9988 | 0.9333 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9655 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 1 | 0.9977 | 0.9800 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9899 |
j | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 0.9930 | 0.9111 | 0.9535 | 0.9975 | 0.9318 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9213 | 0.9577 | 0.9879 | 0.9379 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
PCANet (Ⅱ) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.72% |
PCANet (V1) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 92.10% |
PCANet (V5) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.37% |
RandNet (Ⅱ) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.67% |
RandNet (V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 90.76% |
RandNet (V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.91% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.13% |
MADHGAT (V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
MADHGAT (V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.9727 | 0.9680 | 0.9398 | 0.9746 | 0.9537 |
V | 5 | 488 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9767 | 0.9760 | 0.9457 | 0.9770 | 0.9606 |
A | 13 | 1 | 181 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 5 | 11 | 1 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9797 | 0.9150 | 0.9104 | 0.9882 | 0.9127 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 0.9959 | 0.8333 | 0.9259 | 0.9988 | 0.8772 |
R | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 192 | 0 | 0.9936 | 0.9600 | 0.9846 | 0.9980 | 0.9722 |
j | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 80 | 0.9936 | 0.8889 | 0.9877 | 0.9994 | 0.9357 |
Average | 0.9855 | 0.9209 | 0.9532 | 0.9905 | 0.9360 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9494 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 8 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9698 | 0.9680 | 0.9308 | 0.9705 | 0.9490 |
V | 5 | 486 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9720 | 0.9548 | 0.9811 | 0.9633 |
A | 14 | 2 | 181 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 11 | 9 | 2 | 177 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9773 | 0.8850 | 0.9171 | 0.9895 | 0.9008 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9000 | 0.9643 | 0.9994 | 0.9310 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9977 | 0.9667 | 0.9886 | 0.9994 | 0.9775 |
Average | 0.9864 | 0.9395 | 0.9613 | 0.9909 | 0.9499 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9523 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9750 | 0.9780 | 0.9386 | 0.9738 | 0.9579 |
V | 4 | 489 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9780 | 0.9495 | 0.9787 | 0.9635 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
R | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
j | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9870 | 0.9381 | 0.9595 | 0.9914 | 0.9483 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9547 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9756 | 0.9780 | 0.9404 | 0.9746 | 0.9588 |
V | 3 | 490 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.9800 | 0.9496 | 0.9787 | 0.9646 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
j | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9552 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 2 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9820 | 0.9680 | 0.9699 | 0.9877 | 0.9690 |
V | 1 | 496 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9907 | 0.9920 | 0.9764 | 0.9902 | 0.9841 |
A | 8 | 0 | 191 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9890 | 0.9550 | 0.9502 | 0.9934 | 0.9526 |
F | 3 | 6 | 1 | 190 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9901 | 0.9500 | 0.9645 | 0.9954 | 0.9572 |
n | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.9994 | 0.9667 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9831 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 195 | 1 | 0.9965 | 0.9750 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9848 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9920 | 0.9676 | 0.9747 | 0.9949 | 0.9711 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9721 |
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.01% |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.07% |
DL-CCANet (V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 93.90% |
TL-CCANet (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 86.25% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 93.60% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o ar) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.12% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o 1D-spec) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.77% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o time-domain feature) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.35% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o stack) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.83% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.70% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.94% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.23% |
MADHGAT (V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.47% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
MADHGAT (12 leads) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 97.21% |
Graph | Ov.ACC | Avg-Acc | Avg-Sen | Avg-Ppv | Avg-Spe | Avg-F1 |
without multiple leads | 0.9384 | 0.9824 | 0.9152 | 0.9345 | 0.9884 | 0.9243 |
without single-lead beats | 0.8273 | 0.9507 | 0.7660 | 0.8507 | 0.9670 | 0.7975 |
only multi-lead beats | 0.8070 | 0.9449 | 0.7070 | 0.8542 | 0.9623 | 0.7568 |
full graph | 0.9552 | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 |
Ratio of training set to test set | Method | Ov.ACC |
4:1 | DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 94.01% |
4:1 | 1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 93.60% |
4:1 | 1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 86.25% |
4:1 | MADHGAT | 94.94% |
3:1 | MADHGAT | 94.36% |
2:1 | MADHGAT | 94.48% |
1:1 | MADHGAT | 92.38% |
1:2 | MADHGAT | 90.20% |
Type | Description | Quantity |
N | Normal beat | 500 |
V | Premature ventricular contraction | 500 |
A | Atrial premature beat | 200 |
F | Fusion of ventricular and normal beat | 200 |
n | Supraventricular escape beat | 30 |
R | Right bundle branch block beat | 200 |
j | Nodal (junctional) escape beat | 90 |
Total | 1720 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 487 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9645 | 0.9740 | 0.9103 | 0.9607 | 0.9411 |
V | 13 | 477 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9540 | 0.9483 | 0.9787 | 0.9511 |
A | 20 | 1 | 176 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.9814 | 0.8800 | 0.9565 | 0.9947 | 0.9167 |
F | 10 | 17 | 2 | 170 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9738 | 0.8500 | 0.9189 | 0.9901 | 0.8831 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.8667 | 0.9630 | 0.9994 | 0.9123 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9971 | 0.9667 | 0.9775 | 0.9988 | 0.9721 |
Average | 0.9832 | 0.9245 | 0.9528 | 0.9888 | 0.9377 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9413 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 477 | 7 | 4 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0.9657 | 0.9540 | 0.9298 | 0.9705 | 0.9418 |
V | 4 | 483 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9715 | 0.9660 | 0.9379 | 0.9738 | 0.9517 |
A | 12 | 2 | 183 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9860 | 0.9150 | 0.9632 | 0.9954 | 0.9385 |
F | 17 | 21 | 1 | 157 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.9610 | 0.7850 | 0.8674 | 0.9842 | 0.8241 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 199 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9950 | 0.9851 | 0.9980 | 0.9901 |
j | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9260 | 0.9402 | 0.9884 | 0.9326 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 488 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9581 | 0.9760 | 0.8905 | 0.9508 | 0.9313 |
V | 11 | 482 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9733 | 0.9640 | 0.9451 | 0.9770 | 0.9545 |
A | 25 | 5 | 169 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9779 | 0.8450 | 0.9602 | 0.9954 | 0.8989 |
F | 15 | 14 | 3 | 168 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9767 | 0.8400 | 0.9545 | 0.9947 | 0.8936 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.9988 | 0.9333 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9655 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 1 | 0.9977 | 0.9800 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9899 |
j | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 0.9930 | 0.9111 | 0.9535 | 0.9975 | 0.9318 |
Average | 0.9822 | 0.9213 | 0.9577 | 0.9879 | 0.9379 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9378 |
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
PCANet (Ⅱ) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.72% |
PCANet (V1) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 92.10% |
PCANet (V5) | 2018 | 7 | 1720 | 93.37% |
RandNet (Ⅱ) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.67% |
RandNet (V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 90.76% |
RandNet (V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 92.91% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.13% |
MADHGAT (V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
MADHGAT (V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 93.78% |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.9727 | 0.9680 | 0.9398 | 0.9746 | 0.9537 |
V | 5 | 488 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9767 | 0.9760 | 0.9457 | 0.9770 | 0.9606 |
A | 13 | 1 | 181 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 5 | 11 | 1 | 183 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9797 | 0.9150 | 0.9104 | 0.9882 | 0.9127 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 0.9959 | 0.8333 | 0.9259 | 0.9988 | 0.8772 |
R | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 192 | 0 | 0.9936 | 0.9600 | 0.9846 | 0.9980 | 0.9722 |
j | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 80 | 0.9936 | 0.8889 | 0.9877 | 0.9994 | 0.9357 |
Average | 0.9855 | 0.9209 | 0.9532 | 0.9905 | 0.9360 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9494 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 8 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9698 | 0.9680 | 0.9308 | 0.9705 | 0.9490 |
V | 5 | 486 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9720 | 0.9548 | 0.9811 | 0.9633 |
A | 14 | 2 | 181 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 11 | 9 | 2 | 177 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9773 | 0.8850 | 0.9171 | 0.9895 | 0.9008 |
n | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.9977 | 0.9000 | 0.9643 | 0.9994 | 0.9310 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9800 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9874 |
j | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0.9977 | 0.9667 | 0.9886 | 0.9994 | 0.9775 |
Average | 0.9864 | 0.9395 | 0.9613 | 0.9909 | 0.9499 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9523 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9750 | 0.9780 | 0.9386 | 0.9738 | 0.9579 |
V | 4 | 489 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9785 | 0.9780 | 0.9495 | 0.9787 | 0.9635 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
R | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
j | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
n | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9870 | 0.9381 | 0.9595 | 0.9914 | 0.9483 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9547 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 489 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9756 | 0.9780 | 0.9404 | 0.9746 | 0.9588 |
V | 3 | 490 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.9800 | 0.9496 | 0.9787 | 0.9646 |
A | 16 | 1 | 181 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.9866 | 0.9050 | 0.9784 | 0.9974 | 0.9403 |
F | 7 | 16 | 1 | 175 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.9791 | 0.8750 | 0.9409 | 0.9928 | 0.9067 |
n | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 0.9971 | 0.9000 | 0.9310 | 0.9988 | 0.9153 |
R | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 195 | 1 | 0.9959 | 0.9750 | 0.9898 | 0.9987 | 0.9824 |
j | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 0.9971 | 0.9556 | 0.9885 | 0.9994 | 0.9718 |
Average | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9552 |
Predicted | Acc | Sen | Ppv | Spe | F1-score | |||||||
N | V | A | F | n | R | j | ||||||
N | 484 | 2 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9820 | 0.9680 | 0.9699 | 0.9877 | 0.9690 |
V | 1 | 496 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9907 | 0.9920 | 0.9764 | 0.9902 | 0.9841 |
A | 8 | 0 | 191 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.9890 | 0.9550 | 0.9502 | 0.9934 | 0.9526 |
F | 3 | 6 | 1 | 190 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9901 | 0.9500 | 0.9645 | 0.9954 | 0.9572 |
n | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.9994 | 0.9667 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.9831 |
R | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 195 | 1 | 0.9965 | 0.9750 | 0.9949 | 0.9993 | 0.9848 |
j | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 87 | 0.9965 | 0.9667 | 0.9667 | 0.9982 | 0.9667 |
Average | 0.9920 | 0.9676 | 0.9747 | 0.9949 | 0.9711 | |||||||
Overall accuracy | 0.9721 |
Method | Year | #Types | #Samples | Ov.ACC |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.01% |
DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 94.07% |
DL-CCANet (V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 93.90% |
TL-CCANet (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2019 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 86.25% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 93.60% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o ar) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.12% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o 1D-spec) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.77% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o time-domain feature) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.35% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o stack) (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 94.83% |
1-D CCANet-SVD (Ⅱ and V1) | 2021 | 7 | 1720 | 95.70% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V1) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 94.94% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.23% |
MADHGAT (V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.47% |
MADHGAT (Ⅱ, V1 and V5) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 95.52% |
MADHGAT (12 leads) | 2022 | 7 | 1720 | 97.21% |
Graph | Ov.ACC | Avg-Acc | Avg-Sen | Avg-Ppv | Avg-Spe | Avg-F1 |
without multiple leads | 0.9384 | 0.9824 | 0.9152 | 0.9345 | 0.9884 | 0.9243 |
without single-lead beats | 0.8273 | 0.9507 | 0.7660 | 0.8507 | 0.9670 | 0.7975 |
only multi-lead beats | 0.8070 | 0.9449 | 0.7070 | 0.8542 | 0.9623 | 0.7568 |
full graph | 0.9552 | 0.9872 | 0.9384 | 0.9598 | 0.9915 | 0.9485 |
Ratio of training set to test set | Method | Ov.ACC |
4:1 | DL-CCANet (Ⅱ and V1) | 94.01% |
4:1 | 1-D CCANet-SVD (w/o SVD) (Ⅱ and V1) | 93.60% |
4:1 | 1-D ResNet (Ⅱ and V1) | 86.25% |
4:1 | MADHGAT | 94.94% |
3:1 | MADHGAT | 94.36% |
2:1 | MADHGAT | 94.48% |
1:1 | MADHGAT | 92.38% |
1:2 | MADHGAT | 90.20% |