| Literature DB >> 36267466 |
Abstract
COVID-19 is the most transmissible disease, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus that severely infects the lungs and the upper respiratory tract of the human body. This virus badly affected the lives and wellness of millions of people worldwide and spread widely. Early diagnosis, timely treatment, and proper confinement of the infected patients are some possible ways to control the spreading of coronavirus. Computed tomography (CT) scanning has proven useful in diagnosing several respiratory lung problems, including COVID-19 infections. Automated detection of COVID-19 using chest CT-scan images may reduce the clinician's load and save the lives of thousands of people. This study proposes a robust framework for the automated screening of COVID-19 using chest CT-scan images and deep learning-based techniques. In this work, a publically accessible CT-scan image dataset (contains the 1252 COVID-19 and 1230 non-COVID chest CT images), two pre-trained deep learning models (DLMs) namely, MobileNetV2 and DarkNet19, and a newly-designed lightweight DLM, are utilized for the automated screening of COVID-19. A repeated ten-fold holdout validation method is utilized for the training, validation, and testing of DLMs. The highest classification accuracy of 98.91% is achieved using transfer-learned DarkNet19. The proposed framework is ready to be tested with more CT images. The simulation results with the publicly available COVID-19 CT scan image dataset are included to show the effectiveness of the presented study.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; CT-scan images; Deep learning; Transfer learning
Year: 2022 PMID: 36267466 PMCID: PMC9556167 DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2022.104268
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Signal Process Control ISSN: 1746-8094 Impact factor: 5.076
Fig. 1Layered architecture of the presented methodology.
Fig. 2Layered architecture of the developed DLM.
Fig. 3Schematic view of transfer learning.
Fig. 4Schematic view of the data partition.
Fig. 5Six random CT-images of (a) COVID-19 (b) Healthy classes.
Fold-wise classification accuracy of developed DLM, MobileNetV2, and DarkNet19.
| Fold No. | DLM | MobileNetV2 | DarkNet19 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 95.58 | 96.79 | 98.80 |
| 2 | 96.37 | 97.58 | 98.39 |
| 3 | 95.56 | 97.18 | 98.39 |
| 4 | 95.56 | 97.58 | 99.19 |
| 5 | 98.39 | 98.79 | 99.19 |
| 6 | 96.37 | 98.39 | 99.60 |
| 7 | 95.97 | 97.58 | 99.60 |
| 8 | 94.76 | 97.58 | 99.60 |
| 9 | 94.76 | 97.58 | 98.39 |
| 10 | 95.97 | 97.18 | 97.98 |
| Average | 95.93 | 97.62 | |
Fig. 6Training progress graphs obtained for: (A) DLM (B) MobileNetV2 (C) DarkNet19.
Overall CM obtained for proposed DLM.
| COVID | NON-COVID | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Output Class | COVID | 1190 | 39 | 1229 |
| NON-COVID | 62 | 1190 | 1252 | |
| 1252 | 1229 | 2481 | ||
| Target Class | ||||
Overall CM obtained for MobileNetV2.
| COVID | NON-COVID | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Output Class | COVID | 1224 | 31 | 1255 |
| NON-COVID | 28 | 1198 | 1226 | |
| 1252 | 1229 | 2481 | ||
| Target Class | ||||
Overall CM obtained for DarkNet19.
| COVID | NON-COVID | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Output Class | COVID | 1239 | 14 | 1253 |
| NON-COVID | 13 | 1215 | 1228 | |
| 1252 | 1229 | 2481 | ||
| Target Class | ||||
Overall performance metrics obtained for proposed DLM, MobileNetV2, and DarkNet19.
| Parameters | DLM | MobileNetV2 | DarkNet19 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 95.93 | 97.62 | 98.91 | |
| 95.05 | 97.76 | 98.96 | |
| 96.82 | 97.47 | 98.86 | |
| 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.99 | |
| 96.82 | 97.52 | 98.88 | |
| 95.04 | 97.71 | 98.94 | |
| 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.99 | |
| 98.94 | 99.67 | 99.89 |
Fig. 7Receiver operating characteristic curve plots achieved for explored DLMs.
Performance comparison obtained for COVID-19 screening with previous methods for automated screening of COVID-19 using CT scan data.
| S. No. | Authors | Classification method | Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Kaur et al. | Classifier Fusion | |
| 2. | Mishra et al. | Decision Fusion | |
| 3. | Li et al. | COVNet | |
| 4. | Jaiswal et al. | DesNet201 | |
| 5. | Wang et al. | Modified | |
| 6. | Gaur et al. | EWT with | |
| 7. | Soares et al. | DLM | |
| 8. | Goel et al. | Optimized GAN | |
| 9. | Lu et al. | CGENet | |
| 10. | Basu et al. | Feature selection | |
| 11. | |||