| Literature DB >> 34150188 |
Ahmed I Iskanderani1, Ibrahim M Mehedi1,2, Abdulah Jeza Aljohani1,2, Mohammad Shorfuzzaman3, Farzana Akther4, Thangam Palaniswamy1, Shaikh Abdul Latif5, Abdul Latif6, Aftab Alam7.
Abstract
The world has been facing the COVID-19 pandemic since December 2019. Timely and efficient diagnosis of COVID-19 suspected patients plays a significant role in medical treatment. The deep transfer learning-based automated COVID-19 diagnosis on chest X-ray is required to counter the COVID-19 outbreak. This work proposes a real-time Internet of Things (IoT) framework for early diagnosis of suspected COVID-19 patients by using ensemble deep transfer learning. The proposed framework offers real-time communication and diagnosis of COVID-19 suspected cases. The proposed IoT framework ensembles four deep learning models such as InceptionResNetV2, ResNet152V2, VGG16, and DenseNet201. The medical sensors are utilized to obtain the chest X-ray modalities and diagnose the infection by using the deep ensemble model stored on the cloud server. The proposed deep ensemble model is compared with six well-known transfer learning models over the chest X-ray dataset. Comparative analysis revealed that the proposed model can help radiologists to efficiently and timely diagnose the COVID-19 suspected patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34150188 PMCID: PMC8197673 DOI: 10.1155/2021/3277988
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1COVID-19 diagnosis models: (a) manual COVID-19 diagnosis model and (b) IoT-based automated COVID-19 diagnosis model.
Figure 2Layer-by-layer architecture of the proposed IoT-based automated COVID-19 diagnosis framework.
Figure 3Proposed ensemble deep learning model.
Figure 4Training and validation loss analysis.
Figure 5Proposed ensemble deep learning model confusion matrix analysis of the proposed ensemble model on testing dataset.
Comparative analysis of the proposed ensemble framework and the competitive deep learning models.
| Model | Accuracy |
| Sensitivity | Specificity | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNN | 97.32 ± 0.92 | 97.95 ± 1.21 | 98.02 ± 1.18 | 98.18 ± 1.17 | 97.97 ± 1.03 |
| VGG16 | 98.12 ± 1.06 | 98.19 ± 0.95 | 98.02 ± 1.18 | 98.19 ± 1.18 | 98.08 ± 1.21 |
| ResNetV2 | 98.31 ± 0.98 | 98.51 ± 1.08 | 98.21 ± 1.04 | 98.20 ± 0.94 | 98.16 ± 0.94 |
| DenseNet201 | 98.82 ± 0.92 | 98.73 ± 0.92 | 98.72 ± 0.79 | 98.42 ± 1.04 | 98.48 ± 0.89 |
| Inception V4 network | 98.73 ± 0.96 | 98.83 ± 0.83 | 98.63 ± 1.05 | 98.42 ± 1.12 | 98.62 ± 0.91 |
| ResNet152V2 | 98.82 ± 0.82 | 98.82 ± 0.58 | 98.74 ± 0.83 | 98.83 ± 0.85 | 98.85 ± 0.79 |
| Proposed model | 99.2 ± 0.58 | 99.17 ± 0.61 | 99.12 ± 0.72 | 99.07 ± 0.79 | 99.21 ± 0.67 |