ArticleDigital health
The utility of phonocardiograms in real-time remote cardiac auscultation using an internet-connected electronic stethoscope: Open-label randomized controlled pilot trial.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We have shown classical cardiac auscultation was superior to remote auscultation. We developed a phonocardiogram system to visualize sounds in remote auscultation. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of phonocardiograms on the diagnostic accuracy in remote auscultation using a cardiology patient simulator. Methods: In this open-label randomized controlled pilot trial, we randomly assigned physicians to the real-time remote auscultation group (control group) or the real-time remote auscultation with the phonocardiogram group (intervention group). Participants attended a training session in which they auscultated 15 sounds with the correct classification. After that, participants attended a test session where they had to classify 10 sounds. The control group auscultated the sounds remotely using an electronic stethoscope, an online medical program and a 4-K TV speaker without watching the TV screen. The intervention group performed auscultation like the control group but watched the phonocardiogram on the TV screen. The primary and secondary outcomes were the total test scores and each sound score, respectively. Results: A total of 24 participants were included. The total test score in the intervention group (80/120, 66.7%) was higher than that in the control group (66/120, 55.0%), although the difference was statistically insignificant ( Conclusions: Using a phonocardiogram improved the total correct answer rate by more than 10% in remote auscultation, although statistically insignificant. The phonocardiogram could help physicians screen valvular/irregular rhythm sounds from normal sounds. Trial registration: UMIN-CTR UMIN000045271; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000051710.
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.