2021
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020203511
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DeepCOVID-XR: An Artificial Intelligence Algorithm to Detect COVID-19 on Chest Radiographs Trained and Tested on a Large U.S. Clinical Data Set

Abstract: DeepCOVID-XR, an artificial intelligence algorithm for detecting COVID-19 on chest radiographs, demonstrated performance similar to the consensus of experienced thoracic radiologists. Key Results: • DeepCOVID-XR classified 2,214 test images (1,194 COVID-19 positive) with an accuracy of 83% and AUC of 0.90 compared with the reference standard of RT-PCR. • On 300 random test images (134 COVID-19 positive), DeepCOVID-XR's accuracy was 82% (AUC 0.88) compared to 5 individual thoracic radiologists (accuracy 76%-81%… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
133
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 138 publications
(136 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
133
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This uncertainty notwithstanding, our core observation is that numerous well-cited studies build their datasets by gathering COVID-19-positive radiographs from various sources, as exemplified most thoroughly by the GitHub-COVID repository (in which the image sources and labelling method are clearly documented), and then combine these with COVID-19-negative radiographs originating from the NIH repository, so that we judge that our dataset I fairly represents the key aspects of the data used in these earlier works. Other publications 20,[26][27][28] generally use non-public data, precluding our ability to audit their models, and do not share this issue of strong correlation between data source labels and COVID-19 status. However, based on our review of the literature, we find this issue in an alarming proportion of the publications, including many of the most high-profile studies [4][5][6] .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This uncertainty notwithstanding, our core observation is that numerous well-cited studies build their datasets by gathering COVID-19-positive radiographs from various sources, as exemplified most thoroughly by the GitHub-COVID repository (in which the image sources and labelling method are clearly documented), and then combine these with COVID-19-negative radiographs originating from the NIH repository, so that we judge that our dataset I fairly represents the key aspects of the data used in these earlier works. Other publications 20,[26][27][28] generally use non-public data, precluding our ability to audit their models, and do not share this issue of strong correlation between data source labels and COVID-19 status. However, based on our review of the literature, we find this issue in an alarming proportion of the publications, including many of the most high-profile studies [4][5][6] .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As remarked by van Ginneken [ 22 ], in this field, numerous specific dedicated architectures have shown exceptional diagnostic performance, such as the DeepCOVID-XR algorithm [ 23 ]; CAD4COVID-Xray [ 24 ]; and CV19-Net [ 25 ]. The use of three pre-trained convolutional neural networks [ 18 ], AlexNet [ 26 ], Goog-LeNet [ 27 ], and SqueezeNet [ 28 ], was shown to be successful by Pham [ 18 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, a study has compared the DeepCOVID-XR AI algorithm’s performance to five radiology experts on 300 images. The accuracy of DeepCOVID-XR’s accuracy was higher (82%) than the consensus (81%) of all five radiologists ( Wehbe et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%