| Literature DB >> 35410707 |
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In late 2019 and after the COVID-19 pandemic in the world, many researchers and scholars tried to provide methods for detecting COVID-19 cases. Accordingly, this study focused on identifying patients with COVID-19 from chest X-ray images.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Chest X-ray images; Deep neural network (DNN); DenseNet169; XGBoost
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35410707 PMCID: PMC8958100 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.03.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiography (Lond) ISSN: 1078-8174
Figure 1Sample images in Cohen's dataset.
Figure 2Sample images in the ChestX-ray 8 dataset.
Figure 3Framework of the proposed method.
Comparison of the average accuracies of the different DNNs.
| DNN | Average Accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Three-class Problem | Two-class Problem | |
| Xception | 78.84 | 93.59 |
| VGG16 | 81.68 | 96.48 |
| VGG19 | 80.08 | 95.36 |
| ResNet 50 | 80.71 | 95.51 |
| ResNet 152 | 79.55 | 95.68 |
| ResNet50V2 | 80.53 | 94.71 |
| ResNet101V2 | 76.88 | 93.95 |
| ResNet152V2 | 77.60 | 93.59 |
| InceptionV3 | 79.02 | 92.79 |
| InceptionResNetV2 | 68.44 | 90.72 |
| MobileNet | 79.55 | 95.51 |
| MobileNetV2 | 82.57 | 96.16 |
| DenseNet121 | 82.51 | 96.32 |
| DenseNet169 | ||
| DenseNet201 | 82.31 | 96.63 |
| NASNetMobile | 74.57 | 93.11 |
| EfficientNetB0 | 80.00 | 97.28 |
The XGBoost parameter settings.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Base Learner | Gradient boosted tree |
| Tree construction algorithm | Exact greedy |
| Number of gradients boosted trees | 100 |
| Learning rate | 0.44 |
| Lagrange multiplier | 0 |
| Maximum depth of trees | 6 |
Figure 4Confusion matrices for the 2-class problem.
Figure 5Confusion matrix for the 3-class problem.
Comparison of the proposed method with DarkCovidNet (3-class problem).
| Proposed Method | DarkCovidNet | |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 88.17 | |
| Specificity | 93.66 | |
| Precision | 90.97 | |
| F1-score | 89.44 | |
| Accuracy | 89.33 |
Comparison of the proposed method with DarkCovidNet (2-class problem).
| Performance Metrics | Fold 1 | Fold 2 | Fold 3 | Fold 4 | Fold 5 | Average | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Proposed Method | 95.20 | 95.40 | 81.40 | 91.40 | 92.08 | |
| DarkCovidNet | 90.47 | ||||||
| Specificity | Proposed Method | 89.90 | |||||
| DarkCovidNet | 100 | 96.42 | 90.47 | 93.18 | 95.30 | ||
| Precision | Proposed Method | 99.50 | 95.30 | ||||
| DarkCovidNet | 94.52 | 98.14 | 98.58 | 98.03 | |||
| F1-score | Proposed Method | 98.50 | 92.50 | ||||
| DarkCovidNet | 95.52 | 93.79 | 95.62 | 96.51 | |||
| Accuracy | Proposed Method | 99.20 | 95.20 | ||||
| DarkCovidNet | 97.60 | 96.80 | 97.60 | 98.08 | |||
Comparison of the proposed method with other DL-based methods.
| Study | Type of Images | Number of Samples | Method Used | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apostolopoulos et al. | Chest X-ray | 1428 | VGG-19 | 93.48 |
| Wang et al. | Chest X-ray | 13,645 | COVID-Net | 92.40 |
| Sethy et al. | Chest X-ray | 50 | ResNet 50 + SVM | 95.38 |
| Hemdan et al. | Chest X-ray | 50 | COVIDX-Net | 90.00 |
| Narin et al. | Chest X-ray | 100 | Deep CNN ResNet-50 | 98.00 |
| Song et al. | Chest CT | 1485 | DRE-Net | 86.00 |
| Wang et al. | Chest CT | 453 | M-Inception | 82.90 |
| Zheng et al. | Chest CT | 542 | UNet + 3D Deep Network | 90.80 |
| Xu et al. | Chest CT | 443 | ResNet + Location Attention | 86.60 |
| Ozturk et al. | Chest X-ray | 625 | DarkCovidNet | 98.08 |
| 1125 | 89.33 | |||
| Proposed Method | Chest X-ray | 625 | DenseNet169 + XGBoost | |
| 1125 |
Comparison of the different machine learning algorithms.
| Accuracy (%) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Method | 2-class problem | 3-class problem |
| DenseNet169 + XGBoost | ||
| DenseNet169 + Random Forest | 95.85 | 80.15 |
| DenseNet169 + SVM | 96.96 | 79.20 |
Figure 6Heatmap of two confirmed COVID-19 cases.