MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130683606 · doi:10.1086/678513

Time‐Domain Analysis of Heart Sound Intensity in Children with and without Pulmonary Artery Hypertension: A Pilot Study using a Digital Stethoscope

2014· article· en· W2130683606 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Elgendi, Prashant Bobhate, Shreepal Jain, Jennifer Rutledge, James Y. Coe, Roger J. Zemp, Dale Schuurmans, Ian Adatia

Bibliographic record

VenuePulmonary Circulation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineStethoscopeIntensity (physics)Pulmonary arteryHeart soundsCardiologyPulmonary hypertensionSound intensityInternal medicineSound (geography)RadiologyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied digital stethoscope recordings in children undergoing simultaneous catheterization of the pulmonary artery (PA) to determine whether time-domain analysis of heart sound intensity would aid in the diagnosis of PA hypertension (PAH). Heart sounds were recorded and stored in .wav mono audio format. We performed recordings for 20 seconds with sampling frequencies of 4,000 Hz at the second left intercostal space and the cardiac apex. We used programs written in the MATLAB 2010b environment to analyze signals. We annotated events representing the first (S1) and second (S2) heart sounds and the aortic (A2) and pulmonary (P2) components of S2. We calculated the intensity (I) of the extracted event area (x) as [Formula: see text], where n is the total number of heart sound samples in the extracted event and k is A2, P2, S1, or S2. We defined PAH as mean PA pressure (mPAp) of at least 25 mmHg with PA wedge pressure of less than 15 mmHg. We studied 22 subjects (median age: 6 years [range: 0.25-19 years], 13 female), 11 with PAH (median mPAp: 55 mmHg [range: 25-97 mmHg]) and 11 without PAH (median mPAp: 15 mmHg [range: 8-24 mmHg]). The P2∶A2 (P = .0001) and P2∶S2 (P = .0001) intensity ratios were significantly different between subjects with and those without PAH. There was a linear correlation (r > 0.7) between the P2∶S2 and P2∶A2 intensity ratios and mPAp. We found that the P2∶A2 and P2∶S2 intensity ratios discriminated between children with and those without PAH. These findings may be useful for developing an acoustic device to diagnose PAH.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePulmonary CirculationSame topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207