Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41499578›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2026

Evaluating few-shot prompting for spectrogram-based lung sound classification using a multimodal language model.

Nicholas Dietrich, David McShannon, Mark F Rzepka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Nicholas DietrichTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 1 King's College Cir, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1556-8343
David McShannonFaculty of Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-6321-0193
Mark F RzepkaTranslational Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional deep learning models for lung sound analysis require large, labeled datasets, whereas multimodal large language models (LLMs) may offer a flexible, prompt-based alternative. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of a general-purpose multimodal LLM, GPT-4o, for lung sound classification from mel-spectrograms and assess whether a few-shot prompt approach improves performance over zero-shot prompting. Using the ICBHI 2017 Respiratory Sound Database, 6898 annotated respiratory cycles were converted into mel-spectrograms. GPT-4o was prompted to classify each spectrogram using both zero-shot and few-shot strategies. Model outputs were evaluated against ground truth labels using performance metrics including accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score. Few-shot prompting improved overall accuracy (0.363 vs. 0.320) and yielded modest gains in precision (0.316 vs. 0.283), recall (0.300 vs. 0.287), and F1-score (0.308 vs. 0.285) across labels. McNemar's test indicated a statistically significant difference in performance between prompting strategies (p < 0.001). Model repeatability analysis demonstrated high agreement (κ = 0.76-0.88; agreement: 89-96%), indicating excellent consistency. GPT-4o demonstrated limited but statistically significant performance gains using few-shot prompting for lung sound classification. While current performance remains insufficient for clinical deployment, this prompt-based approach provides a baseline for spectrogram-based multimodal tasks and a foundation for future exploration of prompt-based multimodal inference.

Identifiers

PMID41499578
PMCPMC12779135

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.