Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38545077›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024

Comparison of deep-learning and radiomics-based machine-learning methods for the identification of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on low-dose computed tomography images.

Yu Guan, Di Zhang, Xiuxiu Zhou, Yi Xia, Yang Lu, Xuebin Zheng, Chuan He, Shiyuan Liu, Li Fan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yu Guan *Department of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Di Zhang *Department of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Xiuxiu ZhouDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Yi XiaDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Yang LuShanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Xuebin ZhengShanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Chuan HeShanghai Aitrox Technology Corporation Limited, Shanghai, China.
Shiyuan LiuDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Li FanDepartment of Radiology, Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Second Military Medical University · CNShanghai Changzheng Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Radiomics and artificial intelligence approaches have been developed to predict chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but it is still unclear which approach has the best performance. Therefore, we established five prediction models that employed deep-learning (DL) and radiomics-based machine-learning (ML) approaches to identify COPD on low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) images and compared the relative performance of the different models to find the best model for identifying COPD. Methods: This retrospective analysis included 1,024 subjects (169 COPD patients and 855 control subjects) who underwent LDCT scans from August 2018 to July 2021. Five prediction models, including models that employed computed tomography (CT)-based radiomics features, chest CT images, quantitative lung density parameters, and demographic and clinical characteristics, were established to identify COPD by DL or ML approaches. Model 1 used CT-based radiomics features by ML method. Model 2 used a combination of CT-based radiomics features, lung density parameters, and demographic and clinical characteristics by ML method. Model 3 used CT images only by DL method. Model 4 used a combination of CT images, lung density parameters, and demographic and clinical characteristics by DL method. Model 5 used a combination of CT images, CT-based radiomics features, lung density parameters, and demographic and clinical characteristics by DL method. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, highest negative predictive values (NPVs), positive predictive values, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve of the five prediction models were compared to examine their performance. The DeLong test was used to compare the AUCs of the different models. Results: In total, 107 radiomics features were extracted from each subject's CT images, 17 lung density parameters were acquired by quantitative measurement, and 18 selected demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded in this study. Model 2 had the highest AUC [0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.82], while model 3 had the lowest AUC (0.65, 95% CI: 0.55-0.75) in the test set. Model 2 also had the highest sensitivity (0.84), the highest accuracy (0.81), and the highest NPV (0.36). In the test set, based on the AUC results, Model 2 significantly outperformed Model 1 (P=0.03). Conclusions: The results showed that the identification ability of models that employ CT-based radiomics features combined with lung density parameters, and demographic and clinical characteristics using ML methods performed better than the chest CT image-based DL methods. ML methods are more suitable and beneficial for COPD identification.

Indexed as

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)deep learning (DL)low-dose computed tomography (LDCT)machine learning (ML)radiomics

Identifiers

PMID38545077
PMCPMC10963838
OpenAlexW4392593098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.