ArticleJournal of medical systems2025
Lightweight Hybrid Deep Learning Models for Accurate Classification of Respiratory Conditions from Raw Lung Sounds.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- "Perfection or Overfitting?" Reassessing the Validity of Deep Learning Models for Respiratory Sound Classification.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, progress in artificial intelligence, particularly in the realm of deep learning, has resulted in substantial enhancements in the diagnosis of various medical conditions. This study introduces a framework that leverages multiple lightweight deep learning models to assess their effectiveness in analyzing raw lung auscultation sounds - no feature engineering or preprocessing - to detect eleven different respiratory pathologies. The objective was to enhance the accuracy of respiratory disease diagnoses and conduct a comparative analysis of these models to pinpoint the most efficient model. The models were assessed based on their performance across two distinct datasets, one in its original form and the other after augmentation. The outcomes underscore the successful utilization of the deep learning framework, because it achieves remarkable accuracy in the detection of respiratory pathologies through the analysis of raw lung sounds alone. Furthermore, all the deep learning models proposed in the framework exhibited accuracy rates exceeding 99%, with the hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN)-long short-term memory (LSTM) model, which combines CNN for feature extraction and LSTM for temporal modeling, emerging as the top performer across all datasets. The augmentation process was also proven to be effective, leading to performance enhancements in deep-learning models. Finally, the lightweight hybrid CNN-LSTM model, which is less complex with only 15 layers, outperformed the standalone CNN and LSTM architectures, achieving up to 100% accuracy on the augmented dataset. These results suggest that raw auscultation sounds can be used to reliably detect multiple respiratory pathologies using lightweight and deployable deep learning models. The reported performance metrics reflect in-dataset evaluation only, and external validation on data from additional clinical datasets will be required to assess generalization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41315171What 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.