| Literature DB >> 35692941 |
Manoj Kumar M V1, Shadi Atalla2, Nasser Almuraqab3, Immanuel Azaad Moonesar4.
Abstract
Graphical-design-based symptomatic techniques in pandemics perform a quintessential purpose in screening hit causes that comparatively render better outcomes amongst the principal radioscopy mechanisms in recognizing and diagnosing COVID-19 cases. The deep learning paradigm has been applied vastly to investigate radiographic images such as Chest X-Rays (CXR) and CT scan images. These radiographic images are rich in information such as patterns and clusters like structures, which are evident in conformance and detection of COVID-19 like pandemics. This paper aims to comprehensively study and analyze detection methodology based on Deep learning techniques for COVID-19 diagnosis. Deep learning technology is a good, practical, and affordable modality that can be deemed a reliable technique for adequately diagnosing the COVID-19 virus. Furthermore, the research determines the potential to enhance image character through artificial intelligence and distinguishes the most inexpensive and most trustworthy imaging method to anticipate dreadful viruses. This paper further discusses the cost-effectiveness of the surveyed methods for detecting COVID-19, in contrast with the other methods. Several finance-related aspects of COVID-19 detection effectiveness of different methods used for COVID-19 detection have been discussed. Overall, this study presents an overview of COVID-19 detection using deep learning methods and their cost-effectiveness and financial implications from the perspective of insurance claim settlement.Entities:
Keywords: COVID financial management; COVID-19 diagnosis; artificial intelligence; chest CT; chest X-ray; deep learning; insurance
Year: 2022 PMID: 35692941 PMCID: PMC9184735 DOI: 10.3389/frai.2022.912022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Artif Intell ISSN: 2624-8212
Figure 1Transmission of the SARS-COV (Darapaneni et al., 2020).
COVID-19 cases and fatalities by region (Dhama et al., 2020, see text footnote 4).
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| South America | 37,737,608 | 1,151,181 |
| North America | 44,548,923 | 710,757 |
| European Union and the UK | 45,509,611 | 896,885 |
| Other Europe | 12,406,547 | 179,154 |
| Central America | 5,679,357 | 316,053 |
| Russia and Central Asia | 10,044,890 | 239,175 |
| Middle East | 13,169,156 | 195,989 |
| Caribbean | 1,833,102 | 20,779 |
| South Asia | 38,017,617 | 533,859 |
| Oceania and islands in East Asia | 8,661,338 | 200,334 |
| North Africa | 2,498,484 | 66,730 |
| Sub-Saharan Africa | 5,786,014 | 143,124 |
| East Asia | 5,920,734 | 88,922 |
| Totals | 231,813,381 | 4,742,942 |
Figure 2COVID-19 cases and fatalities were reported by age and gender (see text footnote 1).
Dataset used in different survey papers.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Multiclass-COVID19, community-acquired pneumonia, and normal | CT dataset (Ciotti et al., |
| Multiclass: COVID19, pneumonia, and normal | X-Ray dataset (Cohen and Morrison, |
| Both binary classes–COVID19 and Non-COVID19 and multiclass: COVID19, pneumonia and normal | Xray dataset (Shi et al., |
| Multiclass | X-Ray dataset (see text footnote 5) |
| Multiclass | X-Ray dataset (Cohen and Morrison, |
| Multiclass | X-Ray dataset (see text footnotes 7, 8) |
| Multiclass | Xray dataset (Basu et al., |
Figure 3The suggested architecture may be split into a teacher network and a student network (Shah et al., 2021).
Figure 4Performance metrics table for binary classification (Haritha et al., 2020a).
DenseNet121 performance for multiclass (Haritha et al., 2020a).
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
| 12 | 41.7 | 33.3 | 25 |
| 24 | 33.3 | 45.8 | 20.8 |
| 12 | 33.3 | 25 | 41.7 |
Figure 5Multi-layered convolutional neural network-based flow diagram of CoviNet (Knipe, 2020).
Comparison of various models on COVID-19.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance evaluation of transfer learning technique for automatic detection of patients with COVID-19 on X-Ray Images | CNN based model having 6 layers VGG16, VGG19, Inception V3, Xception, ResNet-50V2, and MoileNet V2 | Accuracy 98% and Sensitivity 100% | Accuracy and the sensitivity of the model decreases even if the slight increase in the noise level of the input data. |
| COVID-19 detection through X-Ray chest images | CNN model based on Resnet, VGG and Densenet | Accuracy 90% by Densenet | This model performance parameters dampen with the increasing size of the dataset. |
| Early detection of COVID19 by deep learning transfer Model for populations in isolated rural areas | CNN model based on Resnet, VGG, Xceptions, MobileNet, DenceNet121 | Accuracy 99% Sensitivity 98.3% | Collection of the dataset from the rural COVID19 infected areas is a challenging task. |
| CoviNet: automated COVID-19 detection from X-rays using deep learning techniques | CoviNet embedded adaptive median filter, histogram equalization, and convolutional neural network | Accuracy 98.6% for the binary group and reveals 95.77% for the multiple class group. | CoviNet model is succumb to class imbalance problem if highly imbalanced data is used for training the classification model |
| COVID detection from chest X-Rays with deep learning: CheXNet | CheXNet | Accuracy 99.9% | More evaluation of the proposed method can be conducted by increasing the number of hidden layers in the proposed model. |
| A new classification model based on stacknet and deep learning for fast detection of COVID-19 through X rays images | CovStacknet based on StackNet meta-modeling | Accuracy 98% | |
| A novel deep convolutional neural network model for COVID-19 disease detection | Two convolutional layers followed by ReLU and max-pooling layers | Accuracy 99.20% | Evaluating the proposed method by employing a range of activation functions is necessary. |
| Machine learning-based approaches for detecting COVID-19 using clinical text data | K nearest neighbor classifier (k-NN) | Accuracy 96% | The proposed method takes clinical text data. It may contain noise. Noise can result in wrong diagnostic decisions. |
| COVIDiagnosis-Net: deep bayes SqueezeNet based diagnostic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Ucar and Korkmaz, | COVID/Pneumonia/normal (3-class) | Binary: 98.08%, Multiclass: 87.02% | The model uses offline methods to do the preprocessing of the images. |
| COVID-Net: a tailored deep convolutional neural network design for detection of COVID-19 cases from chest X-ray images (Wang and Wong, | COVID/Pneumonia/normal (3-class) | Multiclass: 91.3% | Some of the hyperparameters which can be tuned are size of the network, number of layers, dropout rate, learning rate, kernel size etc. By varying these parameters after the initial learning, the performance can be improved over time, which is evident from the COVID-Net. |
| CovXNet: A multi-dilation convolutional neural network for automatic COVID-19 and other pneumonia detection from chest X-ray images with transferable multi-receptive feature optimization (Mahmud et al., | COVID/Non-COVID (Binary) COVID/Non-COVID/Pneumonia (Multiclass) | Multiclass: 90.2% | The learning efficiency of the meta layer can be further improved by increasing the gradient of the activation function to obtain the better results. |
| Application of deep learning for fast detection of COVID-19 in X-rays using nCOVnet (Panwar et al., | COVID/Non-COVID (Binary) | Binary: 97.08%, Multiclass: 87.33% | The response rate of the algorithm can be improved by training with a varied range of input images while at the training time. |
| Automated deep transfer learning-based approach for detection of COVID-19 infection in chest X-rays (Das et al., | COVID/Pneumonia/normal(3-class) | Binary: 99.02% | Combining multiple transfer learning approaches to the proposed method and evaluating the multiple combined transfer learning method needs to be studied. |
Comparison of detection type and time in AED and INR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CXR image | X-ray | 220 | 280 | ~5 min (Haritha et al., |
| CT-scan image | PLAIN | 2420 (see text footnote 9) | 5720 | ~21.5 min (Huang Z. et al., |
| CT-scan image | With Contrast | 2680 (see text footnote 9) | 5720 (see text footnote 11) | ~21.5 min (Huang Z. et al., |
| RT-PCR | RT-PCR | 150 | 400 | ~4 h (Won et al., |
| The deep learning-based system | Graphical-design-based symptomatic techniques | 220 | 100 | ~1 min |
Survey framework.
| Objectives | 1. Literature collection on the recent works done for COVID-19 detection |
| Survey methods | Systematic exploration of articles, white papers, journals, and medical databases/journals |
| Databases explored | IEEE-Xplore, Elsevier Journals, Radiopedia.org, Springer databases, acs.org, GitHub databases |
| Datasets accumulated | CT Dataset (Ciotti et al., |
| Keywords | Deep learning for COVID-19, COVID-19 classification and detection, convolutional neural networks, transfer learning, ensemble learning |
| Inclusion criteria | COVID-19 classification using CNN's |
| Exclusion criteria | Machine learning for COVID-19 and its relevant works |
| #Papers collected | 127 |
| #Papers shortlisted | 70 |
| Outcomes achieved | 1. Architectures summary presented in |
Figure 6Research prospects.