Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 19(1 Pt B): 184-191, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1627037

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in the difference between atherosclerotic vascular disease prevalence measured by a multitask convolutional neural network (CNN) deep learning model using frontal chest radiographs (CXRs) and the prevalence reflected by administrative hierarchical condition category codes in two cohorts of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A CNN model, previously published, was trained to predict atherosclerotic disease from ambulatory frontal CXRs. The model was then validated on two cohorts of patients with COVID-19: 814 ambulatory patients from a suburban location (presenting from March 14, 2020, to October 24, 2020, the internal ambulatory cohort) and 485 hospitalized patients from an inner-city location (hospitalized from March 14, 2020, to August 12, 2020, the external hospitalized cohort). The CNN model predictions were validated against electronic health record administrative codes in both cohorts and assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The CXRs from the ambulatory cohort were also reviewed by two board-certified radiologists and compared with the CNN-predicted values for the same cohort to produce a receiver operating characteristic curve and the AUC. The atherosclerosis diagnosis discrepancy, Δvasc, referring to the difference between the predicted value and presence or absence of the vascular disease HCC categorical code, was calculated. Linear regression was performed to determine the association of Δvasc with the covariates of age, sex, race/ethnicity, language preference, and social deprivation index. Logistic regression was used to look for an association between the presence of any hierarchical condition category codes with Δvasc and other covariates. RESULTS: The CNN prediction for vascular disease from frontal CXRs in the ambulatory cohort had an AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.89) and in the hospitalized cohort had an AUC of 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.75) against the electronic health record data. In the ambulatory cohort, the consensus radiologists' reading had an AUC of 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.92) relative to the CNN. Multivariate linear regression of Δvasc in the ambulatory cohort demonstrated significant negative associations with non-English-language preference (ß = -0.083, P < .05) and Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity (ß = -0.048, P < .05) and positive associations with age (ß = 0.005, P < .001) and sex (ß = 0.044, P < .05). For the hospitalized cohort, age was also significant (ß = 0.003, P < .01), as was social deprivation index (ß = 0.002, P < .05). The Δvasc variable (odds ratio [OR], 0.34), Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity (OR, 1.58), non-English-language preference (OR, 1.74), and site (OR, 0.22) were independent predictors of having one or more hierarchical condition category codes (P < .01 for all) in the combined patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A CNN model was predictive of aortic atherosclerosis in two cohorts (one ambulatory and one hospitalized) with COVID-19. The discrepancy between the CNN model and the administrative code, Δvasc, was associated with language preference in the ambulatory cohort; in the hospitalized cohort, this discrepancy was associated with social deprivation index. The absence of administrative code(s) was associated with Δvasc in the combined cohorts, suggesting that Δvasc is an independent predictor of health disparities. This may suggest that biomarkers extracted from routine imaging studies and compared with electronic health record data could play a role in enhancing value-based health care for traditionally underserved or disadvantaged patients for whom barriers to care exist.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Deep Learning , Liver Neoplasms , Ethnicity , Humans , Radiography , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Deprivation
2.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 21(1): 224, 2021 07 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322935

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many models are published which predict outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The generalizability of many is unknown. We evaluated the performance of selected models from the literature and our own models to predict outcomes in patients at our institution. METHODS: We searched the literature for models predicting outcomes in inpatients with COVID-19. We produced models of mortality or criticality (mortality or ICU admission) in a development cohort. We tested external models which provided sufficient information and our models using a test cohort of our most recent patients. The performance of models was compared using the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC). RESULTS: Our literature review yielded 41 papers. Of those, 8 were found to have sufficient documentation and concordance with features available in our cohort to implement in our test cohort. All models were from Chinese patients. One model predicted criticality and seven mortality. Tested against the test cohort, internal models had an AUC of 0.84 (0.74-0.94) for mortality and 0.83 (0.76-0.90) for criticality. The best external model had an AUC of 0.89 (0.82-0.96) using three variables, another an AUC of 0.84 (0.78-0.91) using ten variables. AUC's ranged from 0.68 to 0.89. On average, models tested were unable to produce predictions in 27% of patients due to missing lab data. CONCLUSION: Despite differences in pandemic timeline, race, and socio-cultural healthcare context some models derived in China performed well. For healthcare organizations considering implementation of an external model, concordance between the features used in the model and features available in their own patients may be important. Analysis of both local and external models should be done to help decide on what prediction method is used to provide clinical decision support to clinicians treating COVID-19 patients as well as what lab tests should be included in order sets.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , China , Hospitalization , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Acad Radiol ; 28(8): 1151-1158, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240127

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The clinical prognosis of outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains difficult to predict, with outcomes including asymptomatic, hospitalization, intubation, and death. Here we determined the prognostic value of an outpatient chest radiograph, together with an ensemble of deep learning algorithms predicting comorbidities and airspace disease to identify patients at a higher risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included outpatients with COVID-19 confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing who received an ambulatory chest radiography between March 17, 2020 and October 24, 2020. In this study, full admission was defined as hospitalization within 14 days of the COVID-19 test for > 2 days with supplemental oxygen. Univariate analysis and machine learning algorithms were used to evaluate the relationship between the deep learning model predictions and hospitalization for > 2 days. RESULTS: The study included 413 patients, 222 men (54%), with a median age of 51 years (interquartile range, 39-62 years). Fifty-one patients (12.3%) required full admission. A boosted decision tree model produced the best prediction. Variables included patient age, frontal chest radiograph predictions of morbid obesity, congestive heart failure and cardiac arrhythmias, and radiographic opacity, with an internally validated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.837 (95% CI: 0.791-0.883) on a test cohort. CONCLUSION: Deep learning analysis of single frontal chest radiographs was used to generate combined comorbidity and pneumonia scores that predict the need for supplemental oxygen and hospitalization for > 2 days in patients with COVID-19 infection with an AUC of 0.837 (95% confidence interval: 0.791-0.883). Comorbidity scoring may prove useful in other clinical scenarios.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Deep Learning , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Adult , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Radiography, Thoracic , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL