Skip to main content

Table 5 A comprehensive comparison with other studies

From: An automatic segmentation method for heart sounds

Methods Application capabilitya Functionsb Positioningc Identifying
N S3 S4 Mur P I Se PPV Acc Se PPV Acc
Proposed method 100 99.93 99.93 98.63 99.86 98.49
Naseri et al. [8] 99.00 98.60 NM
Varghees et al. [21] 99.43 93.56 93.06
Sepehria et al. [22] * 93.6
Moukadem et al. [6] 96/97 95/95 NM 95 97 NM
Moukadem et al. [26] 95 98 NM
Pedrosa et al. [23] 89.2 98.6 NM
Wang et al. [24] NM NM NM NM NM NM
Schmidt et al. [25] 98.8 98.6 NM
Tseng et al. [2] NM NM NM 92.4 88.1 NM
Zhong et al. [27] NM NM NM 92.84 NM NM
Wang et al. [28] NM NM NM 96.8 NM NM
  1. The italic values are represent the optimal results, compared with the results achieved in other methods/studies
  2. aN: normal; Mur: murmurs
  3. bP: positioning; I: identifying; *: only available for S1 and S2
  4. cNM: not mentioned