MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763932722 · doi:10.1109/ihtc.2017.8058166

Towards a low-cost point-of-care screening platform for electronic auscultation of vital body sounds

2017· article· en· W2763932722 on OpenAlexaff
Uzair Mayat, Fayez Qureshi, Saad Ahmed, Yashodhan Athavale, Sridhar Krishnan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStethoscopeAuscultationActive listeningComputer scienceInstrumentation (computer programming)Heart soundsSound (geography)SIGNAL (programming language)Sound qualityProcess (computing)Speech recognitionAcousticsMedicineCommunicationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing pathological sounds is a simple test for understanding what is happening inside the body. This process of listening to the body is traditionally done using a Littmann stethoscope. Traditional stethoscopes are limited by inadequate sound amplification. Thus, if the sound of interest is of low amplitude, as is the case with biomedical sounds, detecting them is difficult. The electronic stethoscope (eStethoscope) platform is designed to facilitate doctors in the act of listening to body sounds. This is achieved by enhancing the functionality of traditional stethoscopes using electronic instrumentation. Additionally, using modern signal processing tools, the eStethoscope serves as a screening and monitoring aid to physicians and a learning aid for students. Preliminary results show that the signals acquired are distinguishable to have originated from their respective sources (heart, lung, and knee). The eStethoscope demonstrates the practicality of using low-cost instrumentation to obtain signal quality that is comparable to clinical grade signals, adding convenience to both the physician and the patient.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.007

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207