Diagnosis of COVID-19 Using CT image Radiomics Features: A Comprehensive Machine Learning Study Involving 26,307 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".