| Literature DB >> 35765538 |
Hareendran S Anand1, S S Vinod Chandra2, A L Aswathy2.
Abstract
COVID-19 has spread worldwide and the World Health Organization was forced to list it as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. The disease has severely impacted most of the people because it affects the lung and causes severe breathing problems and lung infections. Differentiating other lung ailments from COVID-19 infection and determining the severity is a challenging process. Doctors can give vital life-saving services and support patients' lives only if the severity of their condition is determined. This work proposed a two-step approach for detecting the COVID-19 infection from the lung CT images and determining the severity of the patient's illness. To extract the features, pre-trained models are used, and by analyzing them, integrated the features from AlexNet, DenseNet-201, and ResNet-50. The COVID-19 detection is carried out by using an Artificial Neural Network(ANN) model. After the COVID-19 infection has been identified, severity detection is performed. For that, image features are combined with the clinical data and is classified as High, Moderate, Low with the help of Cubic Support Vector Machine(SVM). By considering three severity levels, patients with high risk can be given more attention. The method was tested on a publicly available dataset and obtained an accuracy of 92.0%, sensitivity of 96.0%, and an F1-Score of 91.44% for COVID-19 detection and got overall accuracy of 90.0% for COVID-19 severity detection for three classes.Entities:
Keywords: AlexNet; Computed tomography; DenseNet-201; Neural network; ResNet-50; Transfer learning
Year: 2022 PMID: 35765538 PMCID: PMC9226273 DOI: 10.1007/s12065-022-00739-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evol Intell ISSN: 1864-5909
Fig. 1CT COVID-19 images. Top row represents positive cases and bottom row represents negative cases
Fig. 2Architecture of the proposed system
Fig. 3Activation functions (a) Input image (b) ResNet-50 (c) AlexNet (d) DenseNet-201
Fig. 4High severity(Top row), Moderate severity (Middle row), Low severity(Bottom row)
Fig. 5Architecture of the severity detection system
Results obtained from the proposed COVID-19 detection method
| Pretrained networks | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Precision (%) | Accuracy (%) | F1-Score (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlexNet+DenseNet-201+ | |||||
| ResNet-50 | 96.0 | 88.7 | 87.3 | 92.0 | 91.4 |
| DenseNet-201+ResNet-50 | 89.8 | 90.5 | 88.0 | 90.2 | 88.8 |
| AlexNet+DenseNet-201 | 87.5 | 91.1 | 90.7 | 89.3 | 89.0 |
| DenseNet-201 | 85.7 | 88.9 | 85.7 | 87.5 | 85.7 |
| ResNet-50 | 81.4 | 92.5 | 92.3 | 86.8 | 86.5 |
| AlexNet | 80.4 | 90.2 | 85.7 | 84.8 | 82.9 |
| MobileNetV2 | 80.0 | 88.7 | 85.10 | 83.9 | 82.4 |
Fig. 6Comparison of results obtained using different pre-trained network feature extraction with feed-forward network
Accuracy evaluation of the network with different hidden layer neurons
| Number of hidden layer neurons | Validation (%) | Testing (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | 87.21 | 90.3 |
| 15 | 89.66 | 91.3 |
| 20 | 93.17 | 92.0 |
Confusion matrix for COVID-19 Detection
| Target Class | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | ||
| Output Class | |||
| 1 | 48 42.9% | 2 1.8% | 96.0% 4.0% |
| 2 | 7 6.3% | 55 49.1% | 88.7% 11.3% |
87.3% 12.7% | 96.5% 3.5% | 92.0% 8.0% | |
Fig. 7ROC curve of COVID-19 diagnosis system
Evaluation of COVID-19 detection system with different state-of-the-art methods
| Method | Approach | Sen sitivity (%) | Speci ficity (%) | Acc uracy (%) | F1 Score (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu et al. | VGG16 based lesion attention DNN [1] | 88.80 | NA | 88.60 | 87.9 |
| Wang et al. | UNet [2] | 90.70 | 91.1 | 90.10 | NA |
| Xu et al. | UNet [3] 3D Deep Architecture | 86.7% | NA | 86.7 | NA |
| Zhang et al. | Multi-tasking Seven layer architecture with stochastic pooling [4] | 94.44 | NA | 94.03 | NA |
| Wu et al. | Make use of axial, coronal, sagittal views[5] | 81.1 | NA | 76 | NA |
| He et al. | Self-supervised learning with transfer learning, DenseNet-201[6] | NA | NA | 86 | 85 |
| Sakagianni et al. | Auto machine learning platforms [7] | 88.31 | NA | NA | NA |
| Proposed | AlexNet+DenseNet 201 + ResNet-50 + ANN [Proposed Work] | 96.0 | 88.7 | 92.0 | 91.44 |
Accuracy evaluation of different classifier for severity detection
| Classifier | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|
| Cubic SVM | 90.0 |
| Linear SVM | 73.3 |
| Naive bayes classifier | 67.5 |
| Ensemble Classifier | 88.4 |
| Naive bayes classifier | 80.2 |
| with Gaussian Kernel | |
| Tree | 85.1 |
| KNN | 77.6 |
Confusion matrix for the COVID-19 severity detection
| Target Class | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| Output Class | ||||
| 1 | 17 24.3% | 1 1.4% | 1 1.4% | 89.5% 10.5% |
| 2 | 2 2.9% | 19 27.1% | 0 0.0% | 90.5% 9.5% |
| 3 | 0 0.0% | 3 4.3% | 27 38.6% | 90.0% 10.0% |
89.5% 10.5% | 82.6% 17.4% | 96.4% 3.6% | 90.0% 10.0% | |
Results obtained from the proposed COVID-19 severity detection method for three classes
| Classes | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Precision (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| High Severity | 89.5 | 96.07 | 89.5 |
| Moderate Severity | 90.5 | 82.6 | 91.84 |
| Low Severity | 90.0 | 96.4 | 97.5 |
Evaluation of the proposed severity detection method with other methods
| Author | Perfomance metric | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Chaganti et al. Lung infection | Pearson correlation coefficient | 0.92 for percentage of opacity (P 0.001) |
| Shen et al. Severe non severe | Pearson correlation coefficient | ranged from 0.7679 to 0.837, P 0.05 |
| Xiao et al. Severe non severe | Precision AUC | 81.3% 98.7% |
| Shan et al. Quatifying the infection regions | Dice similarity coefficient | 91.6% 10.0 |
| Pu et al. Severity and progression | Sensitivity specificity | 95% 84% |
| Tang et al. Severe Non severe | Accuracy | 87.5% |
| Proposed Method (HGH, MODERATE, LOW) | Accuracy | 90.0% |