MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387459634 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-42203-0

COVID-Net Biochem: an explainability-driven framework to building machine learning models for predicting survival and kidney injury of COVID-19 patients from clinical and biochemistry data

2023· article· en· W4387459634 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Aboutalebi, Maya Pavlova, Mohammad Javad Shafiee, Adrian Florea, Andrew Hryniowski, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine learningBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicDomain (mathematical analysis)MedicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic in 2020, the global community has faced ongoing challenges in controlling and mitigating the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as well as its evolving subvariants and recombinants. A significant challenge during the pandemic has not only been the accurate detection of positive cases but also the efficient prediction of risks associated with complications and patient survival probabilities. These tasks entail considerable clinical resource allocation and attention. In this study, we introduce COVID-Net Biochem, a versatile and explainable framework for constructing machine learning models. We apply this framework to predict COVID-19 patient survival and the likelihood of developing Acute Kidney Injury during hospitalization, utilizing clinical and biochemical data in a transparent, systematic approach. The proposed approach advances machine learning model design by seamlessly integrating domain expertise with explainability tools, enabling model decisions to be based on key biomarkers. This fosters a more transparent and interpretable decision-making process made by machines specifically for medical applications. More specifically, the framework comprises two phases: In the first phase, referred to as the "clinician-guided design" phase, the dataset is preprocessed using explainable AI and domain expert input. To better demonstrate this phase, we prepared a benchmark dataset of carefully curated clinical and biochemical markers based on clinician assessments for survival and kidney injury prediction in COVID-19 patients. This dataset was selected from a patient cohort of 1366 individuals at Stony Brook University. Moreover, we designed and trained a diverse collection of machine learning models, encompassing gradient-based boosting tree architectures and deep transformer architectures, specifically for survival and kidney injury prediction based on the selected markers. In the second phase, called the "explainability-driven design refinement" phase, the proposed framework employs explainability methods to not only gain a deeper understanding of each model's decision-making process but also to identify the overall impact of individual clinical and biochemical markers for bias identification. In this context, we used the models constructed in the previous phase for the prediction task and analyzed the explainability outcomes alongside a clinician with over 8 years of experience to gain a deeper understanding of the clinical validity of the decisions made. The explainability-driven insights obtained, in conjunction with the associated clinical feedback, are then utilized to guide and refine the training policies and architectural design iteratively. This process aims to enhance not only the prediction performance but also the clinical validity and trustworthiness of the final machine learning models. Employing the proposed explainability-driven framework, we attained 93.55% accuracy in survival prediction and 88.05% accuracy in predicting kidney injury complications. The models have been made available through an open-source platform. Although not a production-ready solution, this study aims to serve as a catalyst for clinical scientists, machine learning researchers, and citizen scientists to develop innovative and trustworthy clinical decision support solutions, ultimately assisting clinicians worldwide in managing pandemic outcomes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIFrench-language works237,207