| Literature DB >> 33520001 |
Erdinç Koç1, Muammer Türkoğlu2.
Abstract
The need for healthcare equipment has increased due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Forecasting of these demands allows states to use their resources effectively. Artificial intelligence-based forecasting models play an important role in the forecasting of medical equipment demand during infectious disease periods. In this study, a deep model approach is presented, which is based on a multilayer long short-term memory network for forecasting of medical equipment demand and outbreak spreading, during the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19). The proposed model consists of stages: normalization, deep LSTM networks and dropout-dense-regression layers, in order of process. Firstly, the daily input data were subjected to a normalization process. Afterward, the multilayer LSTM network model, which was a deep learning approach, was created and then fed into a dropout layer and a fully connected layer. Finally, the weights of the trained model were used to predict medical equipment demand and outbreak spreading in the following days. In experimental studies, 77-day COVID-19 data collected from the statistics data put together in Turkey were used. In order to test the proposed system, the data belonging to last 9 days of this data set were used and the performance of the proposed system was calculated using statistical algorithms, MAPE and R 2. As a result of the experiments carried out, it was observed that the proposed model could be used to estimate the number of cases and medical equipment demand in the future in relation to COVID-19 disease.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Deep LSTM network; Demand forecasting; Pandemic plan; Supply chain
Year: 2021 PMID: 33520001 PMCID: PMC7829095 DOI: 10.1007/s11760-020-01847-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Signal Image Video Process ISSN: 1863-1703 Impact factor: 1.583
Eight-day data belonging to COVID19 disease
| Date | Number of cases | Total number of intensive care patients | Total number of intubated patients |
|---|---|---|---|
| March 27, 2020 | 2069 | 344 | 241 |
| March 28, 2020 | 1704 | 445 | 309 |
| March 29, 2020 | 1815 | 568 | 394 |
| March 30, 2020 | 1610 | 725 | 523 |
| March 31, 2020 | 2704 | 847 | 622 |
| April 01, 2020 | 2148 | 979 | 692 |
| April 02, 2020 | 2456 | 1101 | 783 |
| April 03, 2020 | 2786 | 1251 | 867 |
Fig. 1LSTM structure
Fig. 2The operation principle of the proposed system
Training parameters and values
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Initial learning rate | 0.001 |
| Learn rate schedule | Piecewise |
| Learn drop period | 100 |
| Learn drop factor | 0.001 |
| Gradient threshold | 2 |
Performance results (%) of model proposed for forecasting of case numbers
| Date | Test | Prediction | MAPE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 3, 2020 | 867 | 926.44 | 6.42 | 99.55 |
| June 4, 2020 | 988 | 961.05 | 2.80 | 99.92 |
| June 5, 2020 | 930 | 963.52 | 3.48 | 99.88 |
| June 6, 2020 | 878 | 957.64 | 8.32 | 99.31 |
| June 7, 2020 | 914 | 950.38 | 3.82 | 99.85 |
| June 8, 2020 | 989 | 943.46 | 4.83 | 99.77 |
| June 9, 2020 | 993 | 937.11 | 5.96 | 99.64 |
| June 10, 2020 | 922 | 931.25 | 0.99 | 99.99 |
| June 11, 2020 | 987 | 925.72 | 6.62 | 99.56 |
| Average values | 4.80 | 99.72 |
Fig. 3Forecasting results of proposed model and actual values for number of COVID-19 cases
Fig. 4Forecasting values of model proposed and training values for number of COVID-19 cases
Performance results (%) of model proposed for forecasting of intensive care bed number
| Date | Test | Prediction | MAPE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 3, 2020 | 612 | 626.98 | 2.39 | 99.94 |
| June 4, 2020 | 602 | 620.76 | 3.05 | 99.91 |
| June 5, 2020 | 592 | 616.29 | 3.94 | 99.84 |
| June 6, 2020 | 591 | 613.48 | 3.66 | 99.87 |
| June 7, 2020 | 613 | 612.20 | 0.13 | 100 |
| June 8, 2020 | 625 | 612.34 | 2.06 | 99.96 |
| June 9, 2020 | 642 | 613.71 | 4.61 | 99.79 |
| June 10, 2020 | 631 | 616.17 | 2.40 | 99.94 |
| June 11, 2020 | 643 | 619.57 | 3.78 | 99.86 |
| Average values | 2.89 | 99.90 |
Fig. 5Forecasting results of proposed model and actual values for number of COVID-19 intensive care beds
Fig. 6Forecasting values of model proposed and training values for number of COVID-19 intensive care beds
Performance results (%) of model proposed for forecasting of respiratory equipment number
| Date | Test | Prediction | MAPE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 3, 2020 | 261 | 278.72 | 6.35 | 99.60 |
| June 4, 2020 | 265 | 274.77 | 3.55 | 99.87 |
| June 5, 2020 | 269 | 271.79 | 1.02 | 99.99 |
| June 6, 2020 | 264 | 269.50 | 2.04 | 99.96 |
| June 7, 2020 | 274 | 267.50 | 2.33 | 99.95 |
| June 8, 2020 | 261 | 266.42 | 2.03 | 99.96 |
| June 9, 2020 | 281 | 265.42 | 5.86 | 99.66 |
| June 10, 2020 | 280 | 264.49 | 5.78 | 99.67 |
| June 11, 2020 | 266 | 264.17 | 0.69 | 100 |
| Average values | 3.29 | 99.85 |
Fig. 7Forecasting results of proposed model and actual values for number of COVID-19 respiratory equipment
Fig. 8Forecasting values of model proposed and training values for number of COVID-19 respiratory equipment
Comparison of traditional prediction methods with proposed model
| Case numbers (%) | Intensive care bed numbers (%) | Respiratory equipment number (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| AR | 17.25 | 5.03 | 8.82 |
| ARIMA | 12.57 | 5.53 | 7.96 |
| SVM | 14.01 | 5.25 | 5.73 |
| Decision tree | 15.17 | 8.92 | 6.11 |
| Linear regression | 23.76 | 14.56 | 13.55 |
| Proposed model | 4.8 | 2.89 | 3.29 |