ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Analysis of Machine-Learning Algorithms for Accurate Diagnosis of Lung Diseases Using Chest X-ray Images: A Study on Balanced and Unbalanced Data on Segmented and Unsegmented Images.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study focused on the accurate diagnosis of lung diseases, considering the high number of lung disease-related deaths in the world. Chest x-ray images were used as they are a cost-effective and widely available diagnostic tool. Eight different machine learning algorithms were evaluated: Logistic Regression, Naive Bayes, k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN), Decision Tree, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Ridge, and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO). The study evaluated balanced and imbalanced datasets and looked at both segmented and unsegmented chest x-ray images. COVID-19, pneumonia, normal, and others were the four classes that were used in the investigation. Prior to attribute reduction, Decision Tree and Random Forest performed well on the balanced dataset, obtaining 74% test accuracy and 92% training accuracy. SVM functioned well as well, obtaining a 74% test accuracy. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) are two attribute reduction approaches that were applied. Decision Trees and Random Forests were able to attain the maximum training accuracy of 92%, while SVM was able to retain a test accuracy of 74% after attribute reduction. The findings also imply that some algorithms' performance may be enhanced by attribute reduction methods like PCA and LDA. For imbalanced data, Random Forest and SVM perform the best in terms of balanced accuracy of 80%. However, further research and experimentation may be needed to optimize the models and explore other potential algorithms or techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.