Cargando…
Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of deep learning (DL) in detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to investigate how network architecture and type of datasets affect DL performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed,...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8445811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34649779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2021.08.008 |
_version_ | 1784568732486467584 |
---|---|
author | Komolafe, Temitope Emmanuel Cao, Yuzhu Nguchu, Benedictor Alexander Monkam, Patrice Olaniyi, Ebenezer Obaloluwa Sun, Haotian Zheng, Jian Yang, Xiaodong |
author_facet | Komolafe, Temitope Emmanuel Cao, Yuzhu Nguchu, Benedictor Alexander Monkam, Patrice Olaniyi, Ebenezer Obaloluwa Sun, Haotian Zheng, Jian Yang, Xiaodong |
author_sort | Komolafe, Temitope Emmanuel |
collection | PubMed |
description | RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of deep learning (DL) in detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to investigate how network architecture and type of datasets affect DL performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Inspec from January 1, 2020, to December 3, 2020, for retrospective and prospective studies on deep learning detection with at least reported sensitivity and specificity. Pooled DTA was obtained using random-effect models. Sub-group analysis between studies was also carried out for data source and network architectures. RESULTS: The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88%, 93%; [Formula: see text] = 69%) and 92% (95% CI: 88%, 94%; [Formula: see text] = 88%), respectively for 19 studies. The pooled AUC and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and 112.5 (95% CI: 57.7, 219.3; [Formula: see text] = 90%) respectively. The overall accuracy, recall, F1-score, LR(+) and LR(−) are 89.5%, 89.5%, 89.7%, 23.13 and 0.13. Sub-group analysis shows that the sensitivity and DOR significantly vary with the type of network architectures and sources of data with low heterogeneity are ([Formula: see text] = 0%) and ([Formula: see text] = 18%) for ResNet architecture and single-source datasets, respectively. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of COVID-19 via deep learning has achieved incredible performance, and the source of datasets, as well as network architectures, strongly affect DL performance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8445811 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84458112021-09-17 Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Komolafe, Temitope Emmanuel Cao, Yuzhu Nguchu, Benedictor Alexander Monkam, Patrice Olaniyi, Ebenezer Obaloluwa Sun, Haotian Zheng, Jian Yang, Xiaodong Acad Radiol Original Investigation RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of deep learning (DL) in detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to investigate how network architecture and type of datasets affect DL performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Inspec from January 1, 2020, to December 3, 2020, for retrospective and prospective studies on deep learning detection with at least reported sensitivity and specificity. Pooled DTA was obtained using random-effect models. Sub-group analysis between studies was also carried out for data source and network architectures. RESULTS: The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88%, 93%; [Formula: see text] = 69%) and 92% (95% CI: 88%, 94%; [Formula: see text] = 88%), respectively for 19 studies. The pooled AUC and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and 112.5 (95% CI: 57.7, 219.3; [Formula: see text] = 90%) respectively. The overall accuracy, recall, F1-score, LR(+) and LR(−) are 89.5%, 89.5%, 89.7%, 23.13 and 0.13. Sub-group analysis shows that the sensitivity and DOR significantly vary with the type of network architectures and sources of data with low heterogeneity are ([Formula: see text] = 0%) and ([Formula: see text] = 18%) for ResNet architecture and single-source datasets, respectively. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of COVID-19 via deep learning has achieved incredible performance, and the source of datasets, as well as network architectures, strongly affect DL performance. The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2021-11 2021-09-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8445811/ /pubmed/34649779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2021.08.008 Text en © 2021 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Original Investigation Komolafe, Temitope Emmanuel Cao, Yuzhu Nguchu, Benedictor Alexander Monkam, Patrice Olaniyi, Ebenezer Obaloluwa Sun, Haotian Zheng, Jian Yang, Xiaodong Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | diagnostic test accuracy of deep learning detection of covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Original Investigation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8445811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34649779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2021.08.008 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT komolafetemitopeemmanuel diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT caoyuzhu diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT nguchubenedictoralexander diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT monkampatrice diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT olaniyiebenezerobaloluwa diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sunhaotian diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhengjian diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yangxiaodong diagnostictestaccuracyofdeeplearningdetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |