Abstract: . . .  TrueNeg FalsePos FalseNeg Sens Spec PredAcc Parameters P2c vs. P1c 5-min segments 19 22 3 6 76% 88% 82% paf_threshold=24 pb_threshold=.75 window=5 tau=6.33 Event 3: Prediction CinC Set TruePos TrueNeg FalsePos FalseNeg Sens Spec PredAcc Parameters P vs. N Full 30-min segments 17 53 19 11 61% 74% 70% paf_threshold = 20 pb_threshold  . . .
. . .  in facing a single clinically significant problem, and to foster both friendly competition and wide-ranging collaborations. In the 2001 CinC competition, the challenge was to develop a fully automated method to predict the onset of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation /flutter (PAF), based on the ECG prior to the event. Page 12 12 The top scorers in the 2001 challenge were announced during the 25 September plenary session of Computers . . .
. . .  audits, a few of the 30-minute records in this group may contain very short bursts of PAF episodes that escaped notice while the learning set was being compiled. The 50 records in Group N come from subjects who do not have documented atrial fibrillation , either during the period from which the records were excerpted or at any other time. The subjects include healthy controls, patients referred for long-term ambulatory ECG monitoring, and patients in intensive care units . . .
. . .  few of the 30-minute records in this group may contain very short bursts of PAF episodes that escaped notice while the learning set was being compiled. The 50 records in Group N come from subjects who do not have documented atrial fibrillation , either during the period from which the records were excerpted or at any other time. The subjects include healthy controls, patients referred for long-term ambulatory ECG monitoring, and patients in intensive care units with . . .
. . .  Section 3.3. Test Event 1: PAF screening Event 1 is to determine if subjects at risk of PAF can be distinguished from those representing a larger population, based on their ECGs. The test will involve comparing those ECGs in Group P (PAF), against those in Group N (non-PAF, with other disease), as well as those in Group Q (normal). Test Event 2: PAF detection Event 2 is to determine if subjects identified as at risk of PAF could be reliably identified as . . .
. . .  Page 16 16 Test Event 3: PAF prediction Event 3 is intended to determine if subjects in Group P have distinctive and detectable changes in their ECGs immediately before PAF. (In other words, is the imminent onset of PAF predictable in an individual known to be at risk of PAF?) A successful method for doing so should be able to determine for those in Group P-2c the detectable precursors for those about to suffer an attack. 2.0 Theory  . . .
--3000,6,250,3442,63883