A Scoping Review on COVID-19's Early Detection Using Deep Learning Model and Computed Tomography and Ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the end of 2019, a COVID-19 outbreak has put healthcare systems worldwide on edge. In rural areas, where traditional testing is unfeasible, innovative computer-aided diagnostic approaches must deliver speedy and cost-effective screenings. Conducting a full scoping review is essential for academics despite several studies on the use of Deep Learning (DL) to combat COVID-19. This review examines the application of DL techniques in CT and ULS images for the early detection of COVID-19. In this review, the PRISMA literature review approach was followed. All studies are retrieved from IEEE, ACM, Medline, and Science Direct. Performance metrics were highlighted for each study to measure the proposed solutions' performance and conceptualization; A set of publicly available datasets were appointed; DL architectures based on more than one image modality such as CT and ULS are explored. Out of 32 studies, the combined U-Net segmentation and 3D classification VGG19 network had the best F1 score (98%) on ultrasound images, while ResNet-101 had the best accuracy (99.51%) on CT images for COVID-19 detection. Hence, data augmentation techniques such as rotation, flipping, and shifting were frequently used. Grad-CAM was used in eight studies to identify anomalies on the lung surface. Our research found that transfer learning outperformed all other AI-based prediction approaches. Using a UNET with a predefined backbone, like VGG19, a practical computer-assisted COVID-19 screening approach can be developed. More collaboration is required from healthcare professionals and the computer science community to provide an efficient deep learning framework for the early detection of COVID-19.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".