Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27158515›Full record

ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2016

Wheezes, crackles and rhonchi: simplifying description of lung sounds increases the agreement on their classification: a study of 12 physicians' classification of lung sounds from video recordings.

Hasse Melbye, Luis Garcia-Marcos, Paul Brand, Mark Everard, Kostas Priftis, Hans Pasterkamp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Wheeze and Crackle Discrimination Algorithm in Pneumonia Respiratory Signals.Conference proceedings. IEEE Colombian Conference on Communications and Computing · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Accuracy of chest auscultation in detecting abnormal respiratory mechanics in the immediate postoperative period after cardiac surgery.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hasse MelbyeFaculty of Health Sciences, General Practice Research Unit , UIT the Arctic University of Norway , Tromsø , Norway.
Luis Garcia-MarcosPediatric Respiratory and Allergy Units, Arrixaca University Children's Hospital, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain; IMIB-Arrixaca Biohealth Research Institute, Murcia, Spain.
Paul BrandPrincess Amalia Children's Center, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands; Postgraduate School of Medicine, University Medical Centre and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Mark EverardSchool of Paediatrics, University of Western Australia, Princess Margaret Hospital , Subiaco, Western Australia , Australia.
Kostas PriftisChildren's Respiratory and Allergy Unit, Third Dept of Paediatrics , "Attikon" Hospital, University of Athens Medical School , Athens , Greece.
Hans PasterkampSection of Respirology, Dept of Pediatrics and Child Health , University of Manitoba , Winnipeg, Manitoba , Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe European Respiratory Society (ERS) lung sounds repository contains 20 audiovisual recordings of children and adults. The present study aimed at determining the interobserver variation in the classification of sounds into detailed and broader categories of crackles and wheezes.

methodsRecordings from 10 children and 10 adults were classified into 10 predefined sounds by 12 observers, 6 paediatricians and 6 doctors for adult patients. Multirater kappa (Fleiss' κ) was calculated for each of the 10 adventitious sounds and for combined categories of sounds.

resultsThe majority of observers agreed on the presence of at least one adventitious sound in 17 cases. Poor to fair agreement (κ<0.40) was usually found for the detailed descriptions of the adventitious sounds, whereas moderate to good agreement was reached for the combined categories of crackles (κ=0.62) and wheezes (κ=0.59). The paediatricians did not reach better agreement on the child cases than the family physicians and specialists in adult medicine.

conclusionsDescriptions of auscultation findings in broader terms were more reliably shared between observers compared to more detailed descriptions.

Indexed as

Clinical Epidemiology

Identifiers

PMID27158515
PMCPMC4854017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.