Diagnosis of COVID-19 Using CT image Radiomics Features: A Comprehensive Machine Learning Study Involving 26,307 Patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Purpose To derive and validate an effective radiomics-based model for differentiation of COVID-19 pneumonia from other lung diseases using a very large cohort of patients. Methods We collected 19 private and 5 public datasets, accumulating to 26,307 individual patient images (15,148 COVID-19; 9,657 with other lung diseases e.g. non-COVID-19 pneumonia, lung cancer, pulmonary embolism; 1502 normal cases). Images were automatically segmented using a validated deep learning (DL) model and the results carefully reviewed. Images were first cropped into lung-only region boxes, then resized to 296×216 voxels. Voxel dimensions was resized to 1×1×1mm 3 followed by 64-bin discretization. The 108 extracted features included shape, first-order histogram and texture features. Univariate analysis was first performed using simple logistic regression. The thresholds were fixed in the training set and then evaluation performed on the test set. False discovery rate (FDR) correction was applied to the p-values. Z-Score normalization was applied to all features. For multivariate analysis, features with high correlation (R 2 >0.99) were eliminated first using Pearson correlation. We tested 96 different machine learning strategies through cross-combining 4 feature selectors or 8 dimensionality reduction techniques with 8 classifiers. We trained and evaluated our models using 3 different datasets: 1) the entire dataset (26,307 patients: 15,148 COVID-19; 11,159 non-COVID-19); 2) excluding normal patients in non-COVID-19, and including only RT-PCR positive COVID-19 cases in the COVID-19 class (20,697 patients including 12,419 COVID-19, and 8,278 non-COVID-19)); 3) including only non-COVID-19 pneumonia patients and a random sample of COVID-19 patients (5,582 patients: 3,000 COVID-19, and 2,582 non-COVID-19) to provide balanced classes. Subsequently, each of these 3 datasets were randomly split into 70% and 30% for training and testing, respectively. All various steps, including feature preprocessing, feature selection, and classification, were performed separately in each dataset. Classification algorithms were optimized during training using grid search algorithms. The best models were chosen by a one-standard-deviation rule in 10-fold cross-validation and then were evaluated on the test sets. Results In dataset #1, Relief feature selection and RF classifier combination resulted in the highest performance (Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98, specificity = 0.94, accuracy = 0.96, positive predictive value (PPV) = 0.96, and negative predicted value (NPV) = 0.96). In dataset #2, Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) feature selection and Random Forest (RF) classifier combination resulted in the highest performance (AUC = 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98, specificity = 0.95, accuracy = 0.97, PPV = 0.96, and NPV = 0.98). In dataset #3, the ANOVA feature selection and RF classifier combination resulted in the highest performance (AUC = 0.98, sensitivity = 0.96, specificity = 0.93, accuracy = 0.94, PPV = 0.93, NPV = 0.96). Conclusion Radiomic features extracted from entire lung combined with machine learning algorithms can enable very effective, routine diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia from CT images without the use of any other diagnostic test.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».