European Journal of Radiology Open (Jan 2022)

Artificial intelligence model on chest imaging to diagnose COVID-19 and other pneumonias: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Lu-Lu Jia,
  • Jian-Xin Zhao,
  • Ni-Ni Pan,
  • Liu-Yan Shi,
  • Lian-Ping Zhao,
  • Jin-Hui Tian,
  • Gang Huang

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9
p. 100438

Abstract

Read online

Objectives: When diagnosing Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID‐19), radiologists cannot make an accurate judgments because the image characteristics of COVID‐19 and other pneumonia are similar. As machine learning advances, artificial intelligence(AI) models show promise in diagnosing COVID-19 and other pneumonias. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy and methodological quality of the models. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase, preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv to locate studies published before December 2021, with no language restrictions. And a quality assessment (QUADAS-2), Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) tools and CLAIM checklist were used to assess the quality of each study. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, I2 values to assess heterogeneity, and Deeks' test to assess publication bias. Results: We screened 32 studies from the 2001 retrieved articles for inclusion in the meta-analysis. We included 6737 participants in the test or validation group. The meta-analysis revealed that AI models based on chest imaging distinguishes COVID-19 from other pneumonias: pooled area under the curve (AUC) 0.96 (95 % CI, 0.94–0.98), sensitivity 0.92 (95 % CI, 0.88–0.94), pooled specificity 0.91 (95 % CI, 0.87–0.93). The average RQS score of 13 studies using radiomics was 7.8, accounting for 22 % of the total score. The 19 studies using deep learning methods had an average CLAIM score of 20, slightly less than half (48.24 %) the ideal score of 42.00. Conclusions: The AI model for chest imaging could well diagnose COVID-19 and other pneumonias. However, it has not been implemented as a clinical decision-making tool. Future researchers should pay more attention to the quality of research methodology and further improve the generalizability of the developed predictive models.

Keywords