| Literature DB >> 36081167 |
Yanbiao Zou1, Shenghong Wu1, Tie Zhang1, Yuanhang Yang1.
Abstract
The elderly population in China is continuously increasing, and the disabled account for a large proportion of the elderly population. An effective solution is urgently needed for incontinence among disabled elderly people. Compared with disposable adult diapers, artificial sphincter implantation and medication for incontinence, the defecation pre-warning method is more flexible and convenient. However, due to the complex human physiology and individual differences, its development is limited. Based on the aging trend of the population and clinical needs, this paper proposes a bowel sound acquisition system and a defecation pre-warning method and system based on a semi-supervised generative adversarial network. A network model was established to predict defecation using bowel sounds. The experimental results show that the proposed method can effectively classify bowel sounds with or without defecation tendency, and the accuracy reached 94.4%.Entities:
Keywords: bowel sounds; defecation pre-warning; disabled elderly; generative adversarial network
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36081167 PMCID: PMC9460215 DOI: 10.3390/s22176704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Flowchart of the proposed method.
Figure 2Physiological signal acquisition system.
Figure 3Normal bowel sounds.
Figure 4Bowel sounds before defecation.
Figure 5(a) Schematic diagram of the intestinal tract. (b) Schematic diagram of bowel sound signal collection.
Figure 6(a) Normal bowel sounds (After segmentation). (b) Bowel sounds before defecation (After segmentation).
Figure 7Basic structure of SSGAN.
Figure 8Network structure diagram.
Detailed parameters for generator G.
| Layer Type | Activation Function | Kernel Size | Stride | Padding | Output Size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input | / | / | / | / | 10,000 × 1 × 1 |
| FC | / | / | / | / | 2500 × 1 × 64 |
| Upsampling | / | / | / | / | 5000 × 1 × 64 |
| Convld_1 | ReLU | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5000 × 1 × 64 |
| BatchNorm | / | / | / | / | / |
| Upsampling | / | / | / | / | 10,000 × 1 × 64 |
| Convld_2 | ReLU | 3 | 1 | 1 | 10,000 × 1 × 32 |
| BatchNorm | / | / | / | / | / |
| Convld_3 | Tanh | 3 | 1 | 1 | 10,000 × 1 × 1 |
FC is fully connected layer, Convld is convolutional Layer, and BatchNorm is Batch Normalization.
Detailed parameters for classifier C.
| Layer Type | Activation Function | Kernel Size | Stride | Padding | Output Size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input | / | / | / | / | 10,000 × 1 × 1 |
| Convld_1 | LeakyReLU | 8 | 4 | 2 | 2500 × 1 × 64 |
| Convld_2 | LeakyReLU | 8 | 4 | 0 | 624 × 1 × 64 |
| Convld_3 | LeakyReLU | 8 | 4 | 0 | 155 × 1 × 64 |
| Convld_4 | LeakyReLU | 8 | 4 | 0 | 37 × 1 × 1 |
| FC | Softmax | / | / | / | 3 |
FC is fully connected layer, Convld is convolutional Layer.
Accuracy of different methods in six test sets.
| Tasks | LSTM | CNN | CNN + BiGRU | SSGAN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 79.5% | 81.5% | 87.0% | 92.0% |
| B | 92.0% | 80.5% | 74.5% | 96.0% |
| C | 82.5% | 86.0% | 73.0% | 93.5% |
| D | 86.5% | 83.0% | 77.0% | 92.5% |
| E | 82.0% | 85.5% | 79.5% | 93.5% |
| F | 91.5% | 87.0% | 88.0% | 99.0% |
| Average | 85.7% | 83.9% | 79.8% | 94.4% |
Figure 9Accuracy of the test sets. (a) Accuracy of test set A; (b) Accuracy of test set B; (c) Accuracy of test set C; (d) Accuracy of test set D; (e) Accuracy of test set E; (f) Accuracy of test set F.
The specificity and sensitivity of SSGAN.
| Tasks | TP | TN | FP | FN | Specificity | Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 55 | 129 | 11 | 5 | 92.1% | 91.7% |
| B | 56 | 136 | 4 | 4 | 97.1% | 93.3% |
| C | 53 | 134 | 6 | 7 | 95.7% | 88.3% |
| D | 56 | 129 | 11 | 4 | 92.1% | 93.3% |
| E | 55 | 132 | 8 | 5 | 94.3% | 91.7% |
| F | 59 | 139 | 1 | 1 | 99.3% | 98.3% |
| Average | 55.6 | 133.1 | 6.8 | 4.3 | 95.1% | 92.7% |
TP is true positive, TN is true negative, FP is false positive, FN is false negative.