MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294085647 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-18994-z

High-dimensional multinomial multiclass severity scoring of COVID-19 pneumonia using CT radiomics features and machine learning algorithms

2022· article· en· W4294085647 on OpenAlexaff
Isaac Shiri, Shayan Mostafaei, Atlas Haddadi Avval, Yazdan Salimi, Amirhossein Sanaat, Azadeh Akhavanallaf, Hossein Arabi, Arman Rahmim, Habib Zaidi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)RadiomicsPneumonia2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMultinomial distributionMachine learningAlgorithmMedicinePathologyMathematicsInternal medicineStatisticsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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). The entire lungs were segmented and followed by resizing, bin discretization and radiomic features extraction. 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. The dataset was divided into 50% (555 samples), 20% (223 samples), and 30% (332 samples) for training, validation, and untouched test datasets, respectively. Subsequently, nested cross-validation was performed on train/validation to select the features and tune the models. All predictive power indices were reported based on the testing set. 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 curves (AUCs) for multi-class classifications were calculated and compared for both models. Using BRF, 23 radiomic features were selected, 11 from first-order, 9 from GLCM, 1 GLRLM, 1 from GLDM, and 1 from shape. Ten features were selected using the MARS algorithm, namely 3 from first-order, 1 from GLDM, 1 from GLRLM, 1 from GLSZM, 1 from shape, and 3 from GLCM features. The mean absolute deviation, skewness, and variance from first-order and flatness from shape, and cluster prominence from GLCM features and Gray Level Non Uniformity Normalize from GLRLM were selected by both BRF and MARS algorithms. 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 0.305 and 0.253, respectively. Meanwhile, there was a significant difference between the feature selection models when using a likelihood ratio test ( p value = 0.046). Based on confusion matrices for BRF + MLR and MARS + MLR algorithms, the precision was 0.856 and 0.728, the recall was 0.852 and 0.722, whereas the accuracy was 0.921 and 0.861, respectively. AUCs (95% CI) for multi-class classification were 0.846 (0.805–0.887) and 0.807 (0.752–0.861) for BRF + MLR and MARS + MLR algorithms, respectively. Our models based on the utilization of radiomic 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.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207