| Literature DB >> 33223418 |
M K Pandit1, S A Banday2, R Naaz3, M A Chishti4.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The breakdown of a deadly infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (named SARS n-CoV2) back in December 2019 has shown no respite to slow or stop in general. This contagious disease has spread across different lengths and breadths of the globe, taking a death toll to nearly 700 k by the start of August 2020. The number is well expected to rise even more significantly. In the absence of a thoroughly tested and approved vaccine, the onus primarily lies on obliging to standard operating procedures and timely detection and isolation of the infected persons. The detection of SARS n-CoV2 has been one of the core concerns during the fight against this pandemic. To keep up with the scale of the outbreak, testing needs to be scaled at par with it. With the conventional PCR testing, most of the countries have struggled to minimize the gap between the scale of outbreak and scale of testing.Entities:
Keywords: COVID; Chest radiographs; Neural networks; Transfer learning
Year: 2020 PMID: 33223418 PMCID: PMC7657014 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2020.10.018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiography (Lond) ISSN: 1078-8174
Figure 1Chest radiographs of COVID positive patient, bacterial pneumonia and healthy case.
Figure 2A schematic model for automatic COVID-19 detection.
Figure 3Grad-CAM images of COVID-positive patients (left: heat map, middle: guided grad-cam, right: original x-ray).
Figure 4Grad-cam images of Non-COVID patients (a: Healthy X-ray, b: Bacterial pneumonia, c: SARS, d: Streptococcus).
Figure 5Learning curve accuracy/training loss obtained on VGG-16.
Result metrics obtained.
| Network | Accuracy | Specificity | Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|
| VGG-16 (2 class output) | 96% | 97.27% | 92.64% |
| VGG-16 (3 class output) | 92.53% | 95.1% | 86.7% |
Figure 6Confusion matrix of 2 class case and 3 class case of COVID detection.
Figure 7Chest radiographs of a 50-year-old COVID-19 patient with pneumonia over a week.
Comparison of proposed automatic COVID-19 detection technique using deep learning with other deep learning methods.
| Reference | Types of images | Dataset used | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ioannis et al. | Chest radiographs | 224 COVID-19(+) | 93.48 |
| 700 Pneumonia | |||
| 504 Healthy | |||
| Wang & Wong et al. | Chest radiographs | 53 COVID-19(+) | 92.4 |
| 5526 COVID-19 (−) | |||
| 8066 Healthy | |||
| Sethy & Behar et al. | Chest radiographs | 25 COVID-19(+) | 95 |
| 25 COVID-19 (−) | |||
| Ying et al. | Chest CT | 777 COVID-19(+) | 90.8 |
| 708 Healthy | |||
| Wang et al. | Chest CT | 195 COVID-19(+) | 82.9 |
| 258 COVID-19(−) | |||
| Xu et al. | Chest CT | 219 COVID-19(+) | 86.7 |
| 224 Viral pneumonia | |||
| 175 Healthy | |||
| Zheng et al. | Chest CT | 313 COVID-19(+) | 90.8 |
| 229 COVID-19(−) | |||
| Chest radiographs | 224 COVID-19(+) | 96 | |
| 504 Healthy | |||
| 224 COVID-19(+) | 92.53 | ||
| 700 Pneumonia | |||
| 504 Healthy |