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