8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Artificial Intelligence Applications for COVID-19 in Intensive Care and Emergency Settings: A Systematic Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Little is known about the role of artificial intelligence (AI) as a decisive technology in the clinical management of COVID-19 patients. We aimed to systematically review and critically appraise the current evidence on AI applications for COVID-19 in intensive care and emergency settings. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library databases from inception to 1 October 2020, without language restrictions. We included peer-reviewed original studies that applied AI for COVID-19 patients, healthcare workers, or health systems in intensive care, emergency, or prehospital settings. We assessed predictive modelling studies and critically appraised the methodology and key findings of all other studies. Results: Of fourteen eligible studies, eleven developed prognostic or diagnostic AI predictive models, all of which were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Common pitfalls included inadequate sample sizes, poor handling of missing data, failure to account for censored participants, and weak validation of models. Conclusions: Current AI applications for COVID-19 are not ready for deployment in acute care settings, given their limited scope and poor quality. Our findings underscore the need for improvements to facilitate safe and effective clinical adoption of AI applications, for and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Deep learning.

          Deep learning allows computational models that are composed of multiple processing layers to learn representations of data with multiple levels of abstraction. These methods have dramatically improved the state-of-the-art in speech recognition, visual object recognition, object detection and many other domains such as drug discovery and genomics. Deep learning discovers intricate structure in large data sets by using the backpropagation algorithm to indicate how a machine should change its internal parameters that are used to compute the representation in each layer from the representation in the previous layer. Deep convolutional nets have brought about breakthroughs in processing images, video, speech and audio, whereas recurrent nets have shone light on sequential data such as text and speech.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice

            Multiple imputation by chained equations is a flexible and practical approach to handling missing data. We describe the principles of the method and show how to impute categorical and quantitative variables, including skewed variables. We give guidance on how to specify the imputation model and how many imputations are needed. We describe the practical analysis of multiply imputed data, including model building and model checking. We stress the limitations of the method and discuss the possible pitfalls. We illustrate the ideas using a data set in mental health, giving Stata code fragments. 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR

              Summary In a series of 51 patients with chest CT and RT-PCR assay performed within 3 days, the sensitivity of CT for COVID-19 infection was 98% compared to RT-PCR sensitivity of 71% (p<.001). Introduction In December 2019, an outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Wuhan [1] was caused by a new coronavirus infection named COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 2019). Noncontrast chest CT may be considered for early diagnosis of viral disease, although viral nucleic acid detection using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the standard of reference. Chung et al. reported that chest CT may be negative for viral pneumonia of COVID-19 [2] at initial presentation (3/21 patients). Recently, Xie reported 5/167 (3%) patients who had negative RT-PCR for COVID-19 at initial presentation despite chest CT findings typical of viral pneumonia [3]. The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of chest CT and viral nucleic acid assay at initial patient presentation. Materials and Methods The retrospective analysis was approved by institutional review board and patient consent was waived. Patients at Taizhou Enze Medical Center (Group) Enze Hospital were evaluated from January 19, 2020 to February 4, 2020. During this period, chest CT and RT-PCR (Shanghai ZJ Bio-Tech Co, Ltd, Shanghai, China) was performed for consecutive patients who presented with a history of 1) travel or residential history in Wuhan or local endemic areas or contact with individuals with individuals with fever or respiratory symptoms from these areas within 14 days and 2) had fever or acute respiratory symptoms of unknown cause. In the case of an initial negative RT-PCR test, repeat testing was performed at intervals of 1 day or more. Of these patients, we included all patients who had both noncontrast chest CT scan (slice thickness, 5mm) and RT-PCR testing within an interval of 3 days or less and who had an eventual confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 infection by RT-PCR testing (Figure 1). Typical and atypical chest CT findings were recorded according to CT features previously described for COVD-19 (4,5). The detection rate of COVID-19 infection based on the initial chest CT and RT-PCR was compared. Statistical analysis was performed using McNemar Chi-squared test with significance at the p <.05 level. Figure 1: Flowchart for patient inclusion. Results 51 patients (29 men and 22 women) were included with median age of 45 (interquartile range, 39- 55) years. All patients had throat swab (45 patients) or sputum samples (6 patients) followed by one or more RT-PCR assays. The average time from initial disease onset to CT was 3 +/- 3 days; the average time from initial disease onset to RT-PCR testing was 3 +/- 3 days. 36/51 patients had initial positive RT-PCR for COVID-19. 12/51 patients had COVID-19 confirmed by two RT-PCR nucleic acid tests (1 to 2 days), 2 patients by three tests (2-5 days) and 1 patient by four tests (7 days) after initial onset. 50/51 (98%) patients had evidence of abnormal CT compatible with viral pneumonia at baseline while one patient had a normal CT. Of 50 patients with abnormal CT, 36 (72%) had typical CT manifestations (e.g. peripheral, subpleural ground glass opacities, often in the lower lobes (Figure 2) and 14 (28%) had atypical CT manifestations (Figure 3) [2]. In this patient sample, difference in detection rate for initial CT (50/51 [98%, 95% CI 90-100%]) patients was greater than first RT-PCR (36/51 [71%, 95%CI 56-83%]) patients (p<.001). Figure 2a: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2b: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2c: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 2d: Examples of typical chest CT findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 74 years old with fever and cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows bilateral subpleural ground glass opacities (GGO). B, female, 55 years old, with fever and cough for 7 days. Axial chest CT shows extensive bilateral ground glass opacities and consolidation; C, male, 43 years old, presenting with fever and cough for 1 week. Axial chest CT shows small bilateral areas of peripheral GGO with minimal consolidation; D, female, 43 years old presenting with fever with cough for 5 days. Axial chest CT shows a right lung region of peripheral consolidation. Figure 3a: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3b: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3c: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Figure 3d: Examples of chest CT findings less commonly reported in COVID-19 infection (atypical) in patients with epidemiological and clinical presentation suspicious for COVID-19 infection. A, male, 36 years old with cough for 3 days. Axial chest CT shows a small focal and central ground glass opacity (GGO) in the right upper lobe; B, female, 40 years old. Axial chest CT shows small peripheral linear opacities bilaterally. C, male, 38 years old. Axial chest CT shows a GGO in the central left lower lobe; D, male, 31 years old with fever for 1 day. Axial chest CT shows a linear opacity in the left lower lateral mid lung. Discussion In our series, the sensitivity of chest CT was greater than that of RT-PCR (98% vs 71%, respectively, p<.001). The reasons for the low efficiency of viral nucleic acid detection may include: 1) immature development of nucleic acid detection technology; 2) variation in detection rate from different manufacturers; 3) low patient viral load; or 4) improper clinical sampling. The reasons for the relatively lower RT-PCR detection rate in our sample compared to a prior report are unknown (3). Our results support the use of chest CT for screening for COVD-19 for patients with clinical and epidemiologic features compatible with COVID-19 infection particularly when RT-PCR testing is negative.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                29 April 2021
                May 2021
                : 18
                : 9
                : 4749
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia; tche0014@ 123456student.monash.edu
                [2 ]Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore 169857, Singapore; marcus.ong.e.h@ 123456singhealth.com.sg (M.E.H.O.); fahad.siddiqui@ 123456duke-nus.edu.sg (F.J.S.); andrew.ho@ 123456mohh.com.sg (A.F.W.H.)
                [3 ]Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore 169608, Singapore
                [4 ]Department of Emergency Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310016, China; zh_zhang1984@ 123456zju.edu.cn
                [5 ]Department of Cardiology, National University Heart Centre, Singapore 119074, Singapore; shir_lynn_lim@ 123456nuhs.edu.sg
                [6 ]Health Service Research Centre, Singapore Health Services, Singapore 169856, Singapore
                [7 ]Institute of Data Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117602, Singapore
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4691-0638
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7874-7612
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9046-5105
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1151-2357
                Article
                ijerph-18-04749
                10.3390/ijerph18094749
                8125462
                33947006
                92980c7f-fff3-4eb4-bfae-e6c4aba7bac0
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 25 March 2021
                : 21 April 2021
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                artificial intelligence,machine learning,covid-19,emergency department,intensive care,critical care

                Comments

                Comment on this article