MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inline inspiratory infrasound detection during bilevel mask ventilation

2023· article· en· W4387980474 on OpenAlexaff
Neil M. Skjodt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundStethoscopeAuscultationVentilation (architecture)Sound (geography)Computer scienceAcousticsMedicineMeteorologyPhysicsCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Infrasound (<20 Hz) is generated by many natural and biological phenomena. A stethoscope has been developed to record infrasound, however, such auscultation would be subject to ambient and body surface noise along with interposed tissue dampening. Aim: To record respiratory infrasound from oronasal breath sounds inside a mask before and during bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) ventilation. Methods: A wireless 16 bit accelerometer was mounted securely inside an oronasal mask. 30 s audio epochs were sampled from DC at 1600 Hz and transmitted via Bluetooth (BLE) to a host computer running Ubuntu 22.04 Linux using a custom Python3 script in healthy adult subjects. Ambient unattached and applied mask with and without BiPAP (20/16 cmH2O) .wav files were plotted as spectrograms using Audacity 2.4.2. audio software. Results: Nonambient inspiratory 4 to 5, 9 to 10, and 20 Hz infrasound peaks as fundamental, first overtone, and second overtone frequencies were evident. These peaks were not substantially affected by differences in respiratory rate or by BiPAP. Conclusion: Digital accelerometry can effectively identify oronasal inspiratory infrasound.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207