ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Development of an Electronic Stethoscope and a Classification Algorithm for Cardiopulmonary Sounds.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Fixed-Frequency to Tunable: Advances in Acoustic Sensors for Physiological Acoustic Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Respiratory sound analysis for ICU clinical decision support: deep learning-based classification of normal and abnormal sounds using real ICU data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Prototype of Self-Service Electronic Stethoscope to Be Used by Patients During Online Medical Consultations.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Digital auscultation in clear and present threat of novel respiratory infectious disease: a narrative review.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2025Article
- MYSTETH-home-based heart monitoring.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Digital Pulmonology Practice with Phonopulmography Leveraging Artificial Intelligence: Future Perspectives Using Dual Microwave Acoustic Sensing and Imaging.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Acoustic-Based Deep Learning Architectures for Lung Disease Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Overview.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Review on the Advancements of Stethoscope Types in Chest Auscultation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Real-world evaluation of the Stemoscope electronic tele-auscultation system.Biomedical engineering online · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
With conventional stethoscopes, the auscultation results may vary from one doctor to another due to a decline in his/her hearing ability with age or his/her different professional training, and the problematic cardiopulmonary sound cannot be recorded for analysis. In this paper, to resolve the above-mentioned issues, an electronic stethoscope was developed consisting of a traditional stethoscope with a condenser microphone embedded in the head to collect cardiopulmonary sounds and an AI-based classifier for cardiopulmonary sounds was proposed. Different deployments of the microphone in the stethoscope head with amplification and filter circuits were explored and analyzed using fast Fourier transform (FFT) to evaluate the effects of noise reduction. After testing, the microphone placed in the stethoscope head surrounded by cork is found to have better noise reduction. For classifying normal (healthy) and abnormal (pathological) cardiopulmonary sounds, each sample of cardiopulmonary sound is first segmented into several small frames and then a principal component analysis is performed on each small frame. The difference signal is obtained by subtracting PCA from the original signal. MFCC (Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients) and statistics are used for feature extraction based on the difference signal, and ensemble learning is used as the classifier. The final results are determined by voting based on the classification results of each small frame. After the testing, two distinct classifiers, one for heart sounds and one for lung sounds, are proposed. The best voting for heart sounds falls at 5-45% and the best voting for lung sounds falls at 5-65%. The best accuracy of 86.9%, sensitivity of 81.9%, specificity of 91.8%, and F1 score of 86.1% are obtained for heart sounds using 2 s frame segmentation with a 20% overlap, whereas the best accuracy of 73.3%, sensitivity of 66.7%, specificity of 80%, and F1 score of 71.5% are yielded for lung sounds using 5 s frame segmentation with a 50% overlap.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.