Performance comparison of three ECG interpretation criteria (ESC recommendations vs Seattle Criteria vs Refined Criteria)
| Combined (n=2491) | Arabic (n=1367) | Black (n=748) | Caucasian (n=376) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prevalence of an abnormal ECG using ESC recommendations | 555 (22.3%) | 261 (19.1%) | 224 (29.9%) | 70 (18.6%) |
| Prevalence of an abnormal ECG using Seattle Criteria | 289 (11.6%) | 133 (9.7%) | 124 (16.6%) | 32 (8.5%) |
| Prevalence of an abnormal ECG using Refined Criteria | 132 (5.3%) | 49 (3.6%) | 75 (10%) | 8 (2.1%) |
| Number of identified conditions associated with SCD | 10 (7 HCM; 3 WPW) | 4 (2 HCM; 2 WPW) | 6 (5 HCM; 1 WPW) | 0 |
| FPR when using ESC recommendations | 21.9% | 18.8% | 29.1% | 18.6% |
| FPR when using Seattle Criteria | 11.2% | 9.4% | 15.8% | 8.5% |
| FPR when using Refined Criteria | 4.9% | 3.3% | 9.2% | 2.1% |
ESC, European Society of Cardiology; FPR, false-positive rate; HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; SCD, sudden cardiac death; WPW, Wolff–Parkinson–White syndrome.