Acoustic surveillance of cough for detecting respiratory disease using artificial intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research question: Can smartphones be used to detect individual and population-level changes in cough frequency that correlate with the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other respiratory infections? Methods: This was a prospective cohort study carried out in Pamplona (Spain) between 2020 and 2021 using artificial intelligence cough detection software. Changes in cough frequency around the time of medical consultation were evaluated using a randomisation routine; significance was tested by comparing the distribution of cough frequencies to that obtained from a model of no difference. The correlation between changes of cough frequency and COVID-19 incidence was studied using an autoregressive moving average analysis, and its strength determined by calculating its autocorrelation function (ACF). Predictors for the regular use of the system were studied using a linear regression. Overall user experience was evaluated using a satisfaction questionnaire and through focused group discussions. Results: ; p=0.00001). There was a weak temporal correlation between aggregated coughs and the incidence of COVID-19 in the local population (ACF 0.43). Technical issues affected uptake and regular use of the system. Interpretation: Artificial intelligence systems can detect changes in cough frequency that temporarily correlate with the onset of clinical disease at the individual level. A clearer correlation with population-level COVID-19 incidence, or other respiratory conditions, could be achieved with better penetration and compliance with cough monitoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".