High-Dimensional Multinomial Multiclass Severity Scoring of COVID-19 Pneumonia Using CT Radiomics Features and Machine Learning Algorithms
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract We aimed to construct a prediction model based on computed tomography (CT) radiomics features to classify COVID-19 patients into severe-, moderate-, mild-, and non-pneumonic. A total of 1110 patients were studied from a publicly available dataset with 4-class severity scoring performed by a radiologist (based on CT images and clinical features). CT scans were preprocessed with bin discretization and resized, followed by segmentation of the entire lung and extraction of radiomics features. We utilized two feature selection algorithms, namely Bagging Random Forest (BRF) and Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS), each coupled to a classifier, namely multinomial logistic regression (MLR), to construct multiclass classification models. Subsequently, 10-fold cross-validation with bootstrapping (n=1000) was performed to validate the classification results. The performance of multi-class models was assessed using precision, recall, F1-score, and accuracy based on the 4×4 confusion matrices. In addition, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUCs) for multi-class classifications were calculated and compared for both models using “multiROC” and “pROC” R packages. Using BRF, 19 radiomics features were selected, 9 from first-order, 6 from GLCM, 1 from GLDM, 1 from shape, 1 from NGTDM, and 1 from GLSZM radiomics features. Ten features were selected using the MARS algorithm, namely 2 from first-order, 1 from GLDM, 2 from GLRLM, 2 from GLSZM, and 3 from GLCM features. The Mean Absolute Deviation and Median from first-order, Small Area Emphasis from GLSZM, and Correlation from GLCM features were selected by both BRF and MARS algorithms. Except for the Inverse Variance feature from GLCM, all selected features by BRF or MARS were significantly associated with four-class outcomes as assessed within MLR (All p-values<0.05). BRF+MLR and MARS+MLR resulted in pseudo-R 2 prediction performances of 0.295 and 0.256, respectively. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences between the feature selection models when using a likelihood ratio test (p-value =0.319). Based on confusion matrices for BRF+MLR and MARS+MLR algorithms, the precision was 0.861 and 0.825, the recall was 0.844 and 0.793, whereas the accuracy was 0.933 and 0.922, respectively. AUCs (95% CI)) for multi-class classification were 0.823 (0.795-0.852) and 0.816 (0.788-0.844) for BRF+MLR and MARS+MLR algorithms, respectively. Our models based on the utilization of radiomics features, coupled with machine learning, were able to accurately classify patients according to the severity of pneumonia, thus highlighting the potential of this emerging paradigm in the prognostication and management of COVID-19 patients.
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 | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| 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 ».