Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 2, 2026

Picometer-Precision Atomic Position Tracking through Electron Microscopy
Published on: July 3, 2021
Improvement and limitation of the reliability of automated QT measurement by recent algorithms
Benoît Tyl1, Sara Azzam, Nathalie Blanco
1Department of Cardiology, Robert Ballanger's Hospital, Aulnay Sous Bois, France. tyl@noos.fr
Background:
Newer algorithms for automated QT interval measurements may be more reliable than previous algorithms.
Objective:
This study compares Bazett-corrected QTc obtained by an older algorithm (Old12SL) and by 2 newer ones (New12SL and v3.19) to semiautomated measurement performed by experienced cardiologists.
Methods:
A total of 6105 randomly selected electrocardiograms were classified by the cardiologists as normal (4227), borderline (1254), abnormal (575), or not analyzable (49). Errors of automated measurement were defined by more than 30 milliseconds of absolute difference between Bazett-corrected QTc obtained by automated algorithms and semiautomated measurement.
Results:
The Old12SL had approximately twice as many errors (5.25%) as the New12SL (2.33%) and v3.19 (2.30%), P < .0001. Abnormal tracings resulted in more errors than did normal ones (Old12SL: 16.52% vs 3.45%, New12SL: 7.30% vs 1.51%, and v3.19: 10.61% vs 1.21%).
Conclusion:
Newer automated algorithms for QT measurements are highly reliable in normal tracings. However, electrocardiogram abnormalities increase the risk of QT measurement errors.
More Related Videos
08:40Isokinetic Robotic Device to Improve Test-Retest and Inter-Rater Reliability for Stretch Reflex Measurements in Stroke Patients with Spasticity
Published on: June 12, 2019
11:01Automated Quantification and Analysis of Cell Counting Procedures Using ImageJ Plugins
Published on: November 17, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
Statistical Analysis: Overview
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
Random and Systematic Errors
Uncertainty in Measurement: Reading Instruments
Quality Assurance