Comparison of Deep Neural Networks for the Classification of Adventitious Lung Sounds

4Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Automatic adventitious lung sound classification using deep learning is a promising strategy for objective respiratory disease screening. Evaluating model performance is challenging, particularly with imbalanced clinical datasets. This study compares CNN architectures and proposes a dual-stream classification approach. Methods: Using the public ICBHI 2017 dataset, we compared five pre-trained architectures: VGG16, VGG19, InceptionV3, MobileNetV2, and ResNet152V2. To mitigate class imbalance, we implemented pitch shifting, random shifting, and mixup data augmentation. We also developed and evaluated a novel VGGish-dual-stream network. The primary endpoint was the Average Score (AS), the arithmetic mean of Sensitivity and Specificity. Results: Among benchmarked models, ResNet152V2 achieved the highest AS ((Formula presented.)), approaching the state-of-the-art range (0.56–0.58). This performance was characterised by a high Specificity ((Formula presented.)) but low Sensitivity ((Formula presented.)). Our proposed dual-stream network yielded a more balanced, albeit slightly lower, performance with an AS of (Formula presented.). Conclusions: Standard CNN architectures like ResNet152V2 can achieve competitive classification performance but may exhibit a clinically significant bias towards high specificity at the expense of sensitivity. This trade-off poses a risk of missing pathological events (false negatives). To ensure clinical safety and utility, future work must prioritise strategies that explicitly improve model sensitivity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Polanco-Martagón, S., Hernández-Mier, Y., Nuño-Maganda, M. A., Barrón-Zambrano, J. H., Magadán-Salazar, A., & Medellín-Vergara, C. A. (2025). Comparison of Deep Neural Networks for the Classification of Adventitious Lung Sounds. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207427

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free