ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Respiratory sound analysis for ICU clinical decision support: deep learning-based classification of normal and abnormal sounds using real ICU data.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAuscultation is a noninvasive, real-time method of assessing respiratory diseases; however, its accuracy can vary depending on the clinician’s experience. Although deep learning approaches have shown potential for classifying respiratory sounds, most studies have taken place in controlled environments with minimal noise interference. This may limit their applicability in challenging clinical settings such as intensive care unit (ICU), where ambient noise and equipment interference are common. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a deep learning model for classifying respiratory sounds in ICU environments and to assess the impact of noise-reduction preprocessing techniques.
methodsWe collected 701 respiratory sound recordings from ICU patients at Chungnam National University Hospital, including 325 normal sounds and 376 abnormal sounds (e.g., crackles, wheezes, and rhonchi). All recordings were obtained in a clinical setting and contained background noise from alarms, voices, and equipment. We performed noise reduction using three preprocessing techniques: band-pass filtering, Savitzky–Golay smoothing, and spectral gating noise reduction (SGNR). The sounds were converted into Mel spectrograms using Fourier transformation. We developed a deep learning model based on transfer learning using the Visual Geometry Group (VGG)-16 network for feature extraction and a convolutional neural network for classification. Model performance was evaluated using 10 repeated five-fold cross-validations.
resultsThe baseline model trained on raw ICU recordings achieved an AUC of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.74–0.76) for distinguishing normal from abnormal respiratory sounds. Among the preprocessing techniques evaluated, band-pass filtering yielded the highest performance with an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.80–0.81). Savitzky–Golay smoothing and spectral gating noise reduction showed performance similar to raw (original) data.
conclusionBand-pass filtering was associated with a modest, though statistically significant, improvement in performance compared with unprocessed data. While deep learning–based respiratory sound classification is technically feasible in noisy ICU environments, the current level of performance is limited. Further research is required to clarify its potential role and clinical relevance before any consideration of routine clinical implementation, including multi-class classification, more advanced noise reduction strategies, and multi-center validation.
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.