Attention-guided feature importance-powered chronic obstructive pulmonary disease screening using lung sounds


Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) leads to progressive airflow obstruction, impairing respiratory function. In this study, a deep-learning framework is developed in order to analyze lung sounds (LS) and to support COPD screening through an explainable approach. In the proposed methodology, the LS signals are transformed into spectrograms, highlighting crucial acoustic features. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and vision transformers (ViTs) models are introduced to extract diverse features, enhancing feature representation. Subsequently, an attention-guided feature importance (AGFI) is employed to refine the features. An ensemble architecture leveraging TabNet and Support Vector Machine (SVM) with radial basis function (RBF) as base learners and Neural Oblivious Decision Ensembles (NODE) as a meta learner, is proposed to classify the features into COPD and normal classes. Experimental outcomes validated on internal and external datasets demonstrate the model’s exceptional classification performance. The proposed model achieves outstanding generalization performance on the external dataset with an accuracy of 96.31% and an F1-score of 96.55%, outperforming the traditional ensemble methods. Through the innovative artificial intelligence-powered COPD screening approach, the shortcomings of conventional screening approaches are addressed. The feature extraction architecture and ensemble classification enable the proposed model to offer a scalable, explainable, and clinically reliable solution for diverse healthcare environments.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].