Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34182331›Full record

ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2021

COVID-19 cough classification using machine learning and global smartphone recordings.

Madhurananda Pahar, Marisa Klopper, Robin Warren, Thomas Niesler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Madhurananda PaharDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Stellenbosch University, South Africa. Electronic address: mpahar@sun.ac.za.
Marisa KlopperSAMRC Centre for Tuberculosis Research, DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Biomedical Tuberculosis Research, Division of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, South Africa. Electronic address: marisat@sun.ac.za.
Robin WarrenSAMRC Centre for Tuberculosis Research, DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Biomedical Tuberculosis Research, Division of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, South Africa. Electronic address: rw1@sun.ac.za.
Thomas NieslerDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Stellenbosch University, South Africa. Electronic address: trn@sun.ac.za.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a machine learning based COVID-19 cough classifier which can discriminate COVID-19 positive coughs from both COVID-19 negative and healthy coughs recorded on a smartphone. This type of screening is non-contact, easy to apply, and can reduce the workload in testing centres as well as limit transmission by recommending early self-isolation to those who have a cough suggestive of COVID-19. The datasets used in this study include subjects from all six continents and contain both forced and natural coughs, indicating that the approach is widely applicable. The publicly available Coswara dataset contains 92 COVID-19 positive and 1079 healthy subjects, while the second smaller dataset was collected mostly in South Africa and contains 18 COVID-19 positive and 26 COVID-19 negative subjects who have undergone a SARS-CoV laboratory test. Both datasets indicate that COVID-19 positive coughs are 15%-20% shorter than non-COVID coughs. Dataset skew was addressed by applying the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE). A leave-p-out cross-validation scheme was used to train and evaluate seven machine learning classifiers: logistic regression (LR), k-nearest neighbour (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), multilayer perceptron (MLP), convolutional neural network (CNN), long short-term memory (LSTM) and a residual-based neural network architecture (Resnet50). Our results show that although all classifiers were able to identify COVID-19 coughs, the best performance was exhibited by the Resnet50 classifier, which was best able to discriminate between the COVID-19 positive and the healthy coughs with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.98. An LSTM classifier was best able to discriminate between the COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative coughs, with an AUC of 0.94 after selecting the best 13 features from a sequential forward selection (SFS). Since this type of cough audio classification is cost-effective and easy to deploy, it is potentially a useful and viable means of non-contact COVID-19 screening.

Indexed as

CoughCOVID-19Machine LearningHumansSmartphoneSupport Vector MachineConvolutional neural network (CNN)Cough classificationCOVID-19K-nearest neighbour (KNN)Logistic regression (LR)Long short-term memory (LSTM)Machine learningMultilayer perceptron (MLP)Resnet50Support vector machine (SVM)

Identifiers

PMID34182331
PMCPMC8213969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.