ArticleAnnals of pediatric cardiology
Accuracy of deep learning-based heart sound analysis as screening tool for congenital heart disease: A diagnostic meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of pediatric cardiology. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With over 260,000 yearly mortality, 87% from low socio-economic countries, congenital heart disease (CHD) stands as a major global health crisis. Echocardiography, the current diagnostic standardized approach, often delays diagnosis due to interpretation variability and limited availability in low socioeconomic countries. Hence, exploring alternative screening approaches is crucial. The deep learning (DL) method coupled with heart sound analysis is a promising diagnostic approach for early CHD detection. Objectives: This study focuses on the innovation of DL-based heart sound analysis in enhancing the diagnosis of CHD patients. Methods: The outcomes of interest of the study were the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of various diagnostic tools and DL methods used in diagnosing CHD. Quality appraisal was done using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2, while the diagnostic meta-analysis used Stata MP 17. Results: A comprehensive search across seven databases yielded 19 articles for analysis. Among these, 13 were deemed low-risk and six unclear-risk of bias. The results were observed through meta-analysis with sensitivity at 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85-0.94, P = 0.001), specificity at 92% (95% CI = 0.86-0.95, P = 0.001), and an AUC of 96% (95% CI = 0.94-0.98). Conclusions: The adoption of DL-based heart sound analysis for CHD diagnosis shows promise, demonstrating good diagnostic accuracy and potential as an adjunctive tool to support triage or pre-screening, although further validation is required before it can be considered alongside echocardiography.
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.