Key result
Transfer learning beats scratch training for small ECG datasets but loses advantage as size grows.
Why the study?
The prevailing assumption that transfer learning consistently outperforms training from scratch in deep learning ECG diagnosis had never been systematically validated.
Does transfer learning improve performance in multi-label ECG classification compared to training from scratch?
Does transfer learning improve performance in multi-label ECG classification compared to training from scratch?
Transfer learning is beneficial for small ECG datasets and accelerates training, but may not be necessary for large datasets where training from scratch performs comparably.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Transfer learning may optimize ECG AI development with limited data; leaves open its added value as dataset size scales.
The adoption of deep learning in ECG diagnosis is often hindered by the scarcity of large, well-labeled datasets in real-world scenarios, leading to the use of transfer learning to leverage features learned from larger datasets. Yet the prevailing assumption that transfer learning consistently outperforms training from scratch has never been systematically validated. In this study, we conduct the first extensive empirical study on the effectiveness of transfer learning in multi-label ECG classification, by investigating comparing the fine-tuning performance with that of training from scratch, covering a variety of ECG datasets and deep neural networks. Firstly, We confirm that fine-tuning is the preferable choice for small downstream datasets; however, it does not necessarily improve performance. Secondly, the improvement from fine-tuning declines when the downstream dataset grows. With a sufficiently large dataset, training from scratch can achieve comparable performance, albeit requiring a longer training time to catch up. Thirdly, fine-tuning can accelerate convergence, resulting in faster training process and lower computing cost. Finally, we find that transfer learning exhibits better compatibility with convolutional neural networks than with recurrent neural networks, which are the two most prevalent architectures for time-series ECG applications. Our results underscore the importance of transfer learning in ECG diagnosis, yet depending on the amount of available data, researchers may opt not to use it, considering the non-negligible cost associated with pre-training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2025) studied ECG diagnosis. Transfer learning (fine-tuning) vs. Training from scratch was evaluated on Performance in multi-label ECG classification. Transfer learning accelerates convergence and is preferable for small ECG datasets, but its performance advantage over training from scratch diminishes as downstream dataset size grows.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: