| Literature DB >> 33679271 |
Fang Hu1,2, Mingfang Huang1, Jing Sun3, Xiong Zhang4, Jifen Liu3.
Abstract
Exploring the complicated relationships underlying the clinical information is essential for the diagnosis and treatment of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Currently, few approaches are mature enough to show operational impact. Based on electronic medical records (EMRs) of 570 COVID-19 inpatients, we proposed an analysis model of diagnosis and treatment for COVID-19 based on the machine learning algorithms and complex networks. Introducing the medical information fusion, we constructed the heterogeneous information network to discover the complex relationships among the syndromes, symptoms, and medicines. We generated the numerical symptom (medicine) embeddings and divided them into seven communities (syndromes) using the combination of Skip-Gram model and Spectral Clustering (SC) algorithm. After analyzing the symptoms and medicine networks, we identified the key factors using six evaluation metrics of node centrality. The experimental results indicate that the proposed analysis model is capable of discovering the critical symptoms and symptom distribution for diagnosis; the key medicines and medicine combinations for treatment. Based on the latest COVID-19 clinical guidelines, this model could result in the higher accuracy results than the other representative clustering algorithms. Furthermore, the proposed model is able to provide tremendously valuable guidance and help the physicians to combat the COVID-19.Entities:
Keywords: Analysis model; Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19); Diagnosis and treatment; Medical information fusion
Year: 2021 PMID: 33679271 PMCID: PMC7919532 DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2021.02.016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inf Fusion ISSN: 1566-2535 Impact factor: 12.975
Fig. 1The architecture of diagnosis and treatment analysis model.
Fig. 2Flowchart of data processing.
Evaluation metrics of node centrality.
| Names | Abbreviations | Equations |
|---|---|---|
| Degree centrality | DC | |
| Betweenness centrality | BC | |
| Closeness centrality | CC | |
| Eigenvector centrality | EC | |
| Current flow closeness centrality | CCC | |
| Load centrality | LC | |
Fig. 3Heterogeneous information network of COVID-19 with syndromes (yellow nodes), symptoms (purple nodes), and medicines (blue nodes). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 4Construction of symptom network.
Fig. 5Construction of medicine network.
Statistical summary of the symptom and medicine networks.
| Names | Number of | Number of | Minimum | Maximum | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Symptom network | 83 | 10,126 | 1 | 272 | 13 |
| Medicine network | 316 | 216,327 | 1 | 401 | 11 |
Node centrality analysis of symptom network.
| No. | Symptoms | Degree | Closeness | Betweenness | Eigenvector | Current flow closeness | Load |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||||||
| 2 | |||||||
| 3 | |||||||
| 4 | |||||||
| 5 | |||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 7 | |||||||
| 8 | |||||||
| 9 | 0.0149 | 0.0150 | |||||
| 10 | 0.1718 | ||||||
| 11 | 0.6457 | 0.0157 | 0.1740 | 0.0653 | 0.0156 | ||
| 12 | 0.4756 | 0.6406 | 0.0092 | 0.0650 | 0.0092 | ||
| 13 | 0.4634 | 0.6357 | 0.0075 | 0.1717 | 0.0648 | 0.0075 | |
| 14 | 0.4512 | 0.6308 | 0.0046 | 0.1753 | 0.0645 | 0.0046 | |
| 15 | 0.4512 | 0.6308 | 0.0092 | 0.1653 | 0.0645 | 0.0093 | |
| 16 | 0.4390 | 0.6308 | 0.1510 | 0.0642 | |||
| 17 | 0.4268 | 0.6212 | 0.0070 | 0.1615 | 0.0640 | 0.0070 | |
| 18 | 0.4024 | 0.6029 | 0.0059 | 0.1517 | 0.0628 | 0.0059 | |
| 19 | 0.4024 | 0.6119 | 0.0030 | 0.1615 | 0.0634 | 0.0030 | |
| 20 | 0.4024 | 0.6119 | 0.0057 | 0.1569 | 0.0634 | 0.0056 |
Node centrality analysis of medicine network.
| No. | Medicines | Degree | Closeness | Betweenness | Eigenvector | Current flow closeness | Load |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||||||
| 2 | |||||||
| 3 | |||||||
| 4 | |||||||
| 5 | |||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 7 | |||||||
| 8 | |||||||
| 9 | |||||||
| 10 | 0.0899 | ||||||
| 11 | 0.0109 | 0.1773 | 0.0109 | ||||
| 12 | 0.0113 | 0.0908 | 0.0113 | ||||
| 13 | 0.8794 | 0.8924 | 0.0108 | 0.0904 | 0.1770 | 0.0108 | |
| 14 | 0.8635 | 0.8799 | 0.0109 | 0.0898 | 0.1763 | 0.0109 | |
| 15 | 0.8540 | 0.8726 | 0.0100 | 0.0889 | 0.1759 | 0.0100 | |
| 16 | 0.8476 | 0.8678 | 0.0103 | 0.0883 | 0.1756 | 0.0103 | |
| 17 | Flos Farfarae | 0.8413 | 0.8630 | 0.0080 | 0.0892 | 0.1753 | 0.0080 |
| 18 | 0.8381 | 0.8607 | 0.0087 | 0.0889 | 0.1752 | 0.0087 | |
| 19 | Semen Trichosanthis | 0.8349 | 0.8583 | 0.0084 | 0.0885 | 0.1751 | 0.0084 |
| 20 | Bulbus Fritillariae Thunbergii | 0.8349 | 0.8583 | 0.0086 | 0.0889 | 0.1751 | 0.0086 |
Fig. 6Symptom communities. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 7Medicine communities. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 8Evaluation of different clustering algorithms on the primary symptom network.
Fig. 9Evaluation of different clustering algorithms on the primary medicine network.