Cargando…

Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences

INTRODUCTION: Despite its high prevalence and significance, there is still no widely available method to quantify cough. In order to demonstrate agreement with the current gold standard of human annotation, emerging automated techniques require a robust, reproducible approach to annotation. We descr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel, Rudd, Matthew, Gabaldon-Figueira, Juan Carlos, Carmona-Torre, Francisco, Del Pozo, Jose Luis, Moorsmith, Reid, Jover, Lola, Galvosas, Mindaugas, Small, Peter, Grandjean Lapierre, Simon, Chaccour, Carlos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10649781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001942
_version_ 1785135630358937600
author Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel
Rudd, Matthew
Gabaldon-Figueira, Juan Carlos
Carmona-Torre, Francisco
Del Pozo, Jose Luis
Moorsmith, Reid
Jover, Lola
Galvosas, Mindaugas
Small, Peter
Grandjean Lapierre, Simon
Chaccour, Carlos
author_facet Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel
Rudd, Matthew
Gabaldon-Figueira, Juan Carlos
Carmona-Torre, Francisco
Del Pozo, Jose Luis
Moorsmith, Reid
Jover, Lola
Galvosas, Mindaugas
Small, Peter
Grandjean Lapierre, Simon
Chaccour, Carlos
author_sort Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Despite its high prevalence and significance, there is still no widely available method to quantify cough. In order to demonstrate agreement with the current gold standard of human annotation, emerging automated techniques require a robust, reproducible approach to annotation. We describe the extent to which a human annotator of cough sounds (a) agrees with herself (intralabeller or intrarater agreement) and (b) agrees with other independent labellers (interlabeller or inter-rater agreement); we go on to describe significant sex differences in cough sound length and epochs size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 participants wore an audiorecording smartwatch to capture 6–24 hours of continuous audio. A randomly selected sample of the whole audio was labelled twice by an expert annotator and a third time by six trained annotators. We collected 400 hours of audio and analysed 40 hours. The cough counts as well as cough seconds (any 1 s of time containing at least one cough) from different annotators were compared and summary statistics from linear and Bland-Altman analyses were used to quantify intraobserver and interobserver agreement. RESULTS: There was excellent intralabeller (less than two disagreements per hour monitored, Pearson’s correlation 0.98) and interlabeller agreement (Pearson’s correlation 0.96), using cough seconds as the unit of analysis decreased annotator discrepancies by 50% in comparison to coughs. Within this data set, it was observed that the length of cough sounds and epoch size (number of coughs per bout or attach) differed between women and men. CONCLUSION: Given the decreased interobserver variability in annotation when using cough seconds (vs just coughs) we propose their use for manually annotating cough when assessing of the performance of automatic cough monitoring systems. The differences in cough sound length and epochs size may have important implications for equality in the development of cough monitoring tools. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05042063.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10649781
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106497812023-11-09 Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel Rudd, Matthew Gabaldon-Figueira, Juan Carlos Carmona-Torre, Francisco Del Pozo, Jose Luis Moorsmith, Reid Jover, Lola Galvosas, Mindaugas Small, Peter Grandjean Lapierre, Simon Chaccour, Carlos BMJ Open Respir Res Biomarkers of Disease INTRODUCTION: Despite its high prevalence and significance, there is still no widely available method to quantify cough. In order to demonstrate agreement with the current gold standard of human annotation, emerging automated techniques require a robust, reproducible approach to annotation. We describe the extent to which a human annotator of cough sounds (a) agrees with herself (intralabeller or intrarater agreement) and (b) agrees with other independent labellers (interlabeller or inter-rater agreement); we go on to describe significant sex differences in cough sound length and epochs size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 participants wore an audiorecording smartwatch to capture 6–24 hours of continuous audio. A randomly selected sample of the whole audio was labelled twice by an expert annotator and a third time by six trained annotators. We collected 400 hours of audio and analysed 40 hours. The cough counts as well as cough seconds (any 1 s of time containing at least one cough) from different annotators were compared and summary statistics from linear and Bland-Altman analyses were used to quantify intraobserver and interobserver agreement. RESULTS: There was excellent intralabeller (less than two disagreements per hour monitored, Pearson’s correlation 0.98) and interlabeller agreement (Pearson’s correlation 0.96), using cough seconds as the unit of analysis decreased annotator discrepancies by 50% in comparison to coughs. Within this data set, it was observed that the length of cough sounds and epoch size (number of coughs per bout or attach) differed between women and men. CONCLUSION: Given the decreased interobserver variability in annotation when using cough seconds (vs just coughs) we propose their use for manually annotating cough when assessing of the performance of automatic cough monitoring systems. The differences in cough sound length and epochs size may have important implications for equality in the development of cough monitoring tools. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05042063. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10649781/ /pubmed/37945314 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001942 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Biomarkers of Disease
Sanchez-Olivieri, Isabel
Rudd, Matthew
Gabaldon-Figueira, Juan Carlos
Carmona-Torre, Francisco
Del Pozo, Jose Luis
Moorsmith, Reid
Jover, Lola
Galvosas, Mindaugas
Small, Peter
Grandjean Lapierre, Simon
Chaccour, Carlos
Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title_full Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title_fullStr Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title_full_unstemmed Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title_short Performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
title_sort performance evaluation of human cough annotators: optimal metrics and sex differences
topic Biomarkers of Disease
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10649781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001942
work_keys_str_mv AT sanchezolivieriisabel performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT ruddmatthew performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT gabaldonfigueirajuancarlos performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT carmonatorrefrancisco performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT delpozojoseluis performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT moorsmithreid performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT joverlola performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT galvosasmindaugas performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT smallpeter performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT grandjeanlapierresimon performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences
AT chaccourcarlos performanceevaluationofhumancoughannotatorsoptimalmetricsandsexdifferences