Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40249944›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2025

Artificial Intelligence Models for Pediatric Lung Sound Analysis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ji Soo Park, Sa-Yoon Park, Jae Won Moon, Kwangsoo Kim, Dong In Suh

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors.

Ji Soo Park *Department of Pediatrics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0522-7736
Sa-Yoon Park *The Institute of Convergence Medicine with Innovative Technology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4058-9457
Jae Won MoonDepartment of Pediatrics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4534-7342
Kwangsoo Kim *The Institute of Convergence Medicine with Innovative Technology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4586-5062
Dong In Suh *Department of Pediatrics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7817-8728

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPediatric respiratory diseases, including asthma and pneumonia, are major causes of morbidity and mortality in children. Auscultation of lung sounds is a key diagnostic tool but is prone to subjective variability. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) with electronic stethoscopes offers a promising approach for automated and objective lung sound.

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis assess the performance of ML models in pediatric lung sound analysis. The study evaluates the methodologies, model performance, and database characteristics while identifying limitations and future directions for clinical implementation.

methodsA systematic search was conducted in Medline via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, OVID, and IEEE Xplore for studies published between January 1, 1990, and December 16, 2024. Inclusion criteria are as follows: studies developing ML models for pediatric lung sound classification with a defined database, physician-labeled reference standard, and reported performance metrics. Exclusion criteria are as follows: studies focusing on adults, cardiac auscultation, validation of existing models, or lacking performance metrics. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (version 2) framework. Data were extracted on study design, dataset, ML methods, feature extraction, and classification tasks. Bivariate meta-analysis was performed for binary classification tasks, including wheezing and abnormal lung sound detection.

resultsA total of 41 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common classification task was binary detection of abnormal lung sounds, particularly wheezing. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for wheeze detection were 0.902 (95% CI 0.726-0.970) and 0.955 (95% CI 0.762-0.993), respectively. For abnormal lung sound detection, pooled sensitivity was 0.907 (95% CI 0.816-0.956) and specificity 0.877 (95% CI 0.813-0.921). The most frequently used feature extraction methods were Mel-spectrogram, Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients, and short-time Fourier transform. Convolutional neural networks were the predominant ML model, often combined with recurrent neural networks or residual network architectures. However, high heterogeneity in dataset size, annotation methods, and evaluation criteria were observed. Most studies relied on small, single-center datasets, limiting generalizability.

conclusionsML models show high accuracy in pediatric lung sound analysis, but face limitations due to dataset heterogeneity, lack of standard guidelines, and limited external validation. Future research should focus on standardized protocols and the development of large-scale, multicenter datasets to improve model robustness and clinical implementation.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAuscultationRespiratory SoundsChildHumansMachine LearningStethoscopesabnormal lung sound detectionartificial intelligenceasthmaauscultationchildrendiagnosticlung sound analysismachine learningmel-spectrogrammorbiditymortalitypediatricpneumoniarespiratory disease classificationrespiratory pathologysystematic reviewwheeze detection

Identifiers

PMID40249944
PMCPMC12048790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.