Role of Machine Learning Techniques to Tackle the COVID-19 Crisis: Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus responsible for COVID-19, has caused havoc worldwide, with patients presenting a spectrum of complications that have pushed health care experts to explore new technological solutions and treatment plans. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based technologies have played a substantial role in solving complex problems, and several organizations have been swift to adopt and customize these technologies in response to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the role of AI as a comprehensive and decisive technology to fight the COVID-19 crisis in the fields of epidemiology, diagnosis, and disease progression. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines to identify all potentially relevant studies published and made available online between December 1, 2019, and June 27, 2020. The search syntax was built using keywords specific to COVID-19 and AI. RESULTS: The search strategy resulted in 419 articles published and made available online during the aforementioned period. Of these, 130 publications were selected for further analyses. These publications were classified into 3 themes based on AI applications employed to combat the COVID-19 crisis: Computational Epidemiology, Early Detection and Diagnosis, and Disease Progression. Of the 130 studies, 71 (54.6%) focused on predicting the COVID-19 outbreak, the impact of containment policies, and potential drug discoveries, which were classified under the Computational Epidemiology theme. Next, 40 of 130 (30.8%) studies that applied AI techniques to detect COVID-19 by using patients' radiological images or laboratory test results were classified under the Early Detection and Diagnosis theme. Finally, 19 of the 130 studies (14.6%) that focused on predicting disease progression, outcomes (ie, recovery and mortality), length of hospital stay, and number of days spent in the intensive care unit for patients with COVID-19 were classified under the Disease Progression theme. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review, we assembled studies in the current COVID-19 literature that utilized AI-based methods to provide insights into different COVID-19 themes. Our findings highlight important variables, data types, and available COVID-19 resources that can assist in facilitating clinical and translational research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it