Cargando…
Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective
SARS-CoV-2 has infected over ∼165 million people worldwide causing Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and has killed ∼3.4 million people. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has shown to benefit in the biomedical image such as X-ray/Computed Tomography in diagnosis of ARDS, but there are limited AI...
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
---|---|
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
IEEE
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8843049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34379599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2021.3103839 |
_version_ | 1784651170281684992 |
---|---|
collection | PubMed |
description | SARS-CoV-2 has infected over ∼165 million people worldwide causing Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and has killed ∼3.4 million people. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has shown to benefit in the biomedical image such as X-ray/Computed Tomography in diagnosis of ARDS, but there are limited AI-based systematic reviews (aiSR). The purpose of this study is to understand the Risk-of-Bias (RoB) in a non-randomized AI trial for handling ARDS using novel AtheroPoint-AI-Bias (AP(ai)Bias). Our hypothesis for acceptance of a study to be in low RoB must have a mean score of 80% in a study. Using the PRISMA model, 42 best AI studies were analyzed to understand the RoB. Using the AP(ai)Bias paradigm, the top 19 studies were then chosen using the raw-cutoff of 1.9. This was obtained using the intersection of the cumulative plot of “mean score vs. study” and score distribution. Finally, these studies were benchmarked against ROBINS-I and PROBAST paradigm. Our observation showed that AP(ai)Bias, ROBINS-I, and PROBAST had only 32%, 16%, and 26% studies, respectively in low-moderate RoB (cutoff>2.5), however none of them met the RoB hypothesis. Further, the aiSR analysis recommends six primary and six secondary recommendations for the non-randomized AI for ARDS. The primary recommendations for improvement in AI-based ARDS design inclusive of (i) comorbidity, (ii) inter-and intra-observer variability studies, (iii) large data size, (iv) clinical validation, (v) granularity of COVID-19 risk, and (vi) cross-modality scientific validation. The AI is an important component for diagnosis of ARDS and the recommendations must be followed to lower the RoB. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8843049 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | IEEE |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88430492022-05-13 Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Article SARS-CoV-2 has infected over ∼165 million people worldwide causing Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and has killed ∼3.4 million people. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has shown to benefit in the biomedical image such as X-ray/Computed Tomography in diagnosis of ARDS, but there are limited AI-based systematic reviews (aiSR). The purpose of this study is to understand the Risk-of-Bias (RoB) in a non-randomized AI trial for handling ARDS using novel AtheroPoint-AI-Bias (AP(ai)Bias). Our hypothesis for acceptance of a study to be in low RoB must have a mean score of 80% in a study. Using the PRISMA model, 42 best AI studies were analyzed to understand the RoB. Using the AP(ai)Bias paradigm, the top 19 studies were then chosen using the raw-cutoff of 1.9. This was obtained using the intersection of the cumulative plot of “mean score vs. study” and score distribution. Finally, these studies were benchmarked against ROBINS-I and PROBAST paradigm. Our observation showed that AP(ai)Bias, ROBINS-I, and PROBAST had only 32%, 16%, and 26% studies, respectively in low-moderate RoB (cutoff>2.5), however none of them met the RoB hypothesis. Further, the aiSR analysis recommends six primary and six secondary recommendations for the non-randomized AI for ARDS. The primary recommendations for improvement in AI-based ARDS design inclusive of (i) comorbidity, (ii) inter-and intra-observer variability studies, (iii) large data size, (iv) clinical validation, (v) granularity of COVID-19 risk, and (vi) cross-modality scientific validation. The AI is an important component for diagnosis of ARDS and the recommendations must be followed to lower the RoB. IEEE 2021-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8843049/ /pubmed/34379599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2021.3103839 Text en This article is free to access and download, along with rights for full text and data mining, re-use and analysis. |
spellingShingle | Article Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title | Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title_full | Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title_fullStr | Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title_short | Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for COVID-19 Lung Patients: A Biomedical Imaging Perspective |
title_sort | systematic review of artificial intelligence in acute respiratory distress syndrome for covid-19 lung patients: a biomedical imaging perspective |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8843049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34379599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2021.3103839 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective AT systematicreviewofartificialintelligenceinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeforcovid19lungpatientsabiomedicalimagingperspective |