Five Strategies for Bias Estimation in Artificial Intelligence-based Hybrid Deep Learning for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome COVID-19 Lung Infected Patients using AP(ai)Bias 2.0: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has led to a global pandemic infecting 224 million people and has caused 4.6 million deaths. Nearly 80 Artificial Intelligence (AI) articles have been published on COVID-19 diagnosis. The first systematic review on the Deep Learning (DL)-based paradigm for COVID-19 diagnosis was recently published by Suri et al. [IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2021]. The above study used AtheroPoint’s “AP(ai)Bias 1.0”using 10 AI attributes in the DL framework. The proposed study uses “AP(ai)Bias 2.0”as part of the three quantitative paradigms for Risk-of-Bias quantification by using the best 40 dedicated Hybrid DL (HDL) studies and utilizing 39 AI attributes. In the first method, the radial-bias map (RBM) was computed for each AI study, followed by the computation of bias value. In the second method, the regional-bias area (RBA) was computed by the area difference between the best and the worst AI performing attributes. In the third method, ranking-bias score (RBS) was computed, where AI-based cumulative scores were computed for all the 40 studies. These studies were ranked, and the cutoff was determined, categorizing the HDL studies into three bins low, moderate, and high. Using the Venn diagram, these three quantitative methods were benchmarked against the two qualitative non-randomized-based AI trial methods (ROBINS-I and PROBAST). Using the analytically derived moderate-high and low-moderate cutoff of 2.9 and 3.6, respectively, we observed 40%, 27.5%, 17.5%, 10%, and 20% of studies were low-biased for RBM, RBA, RBS, ROBINS-I, and PROBAST, respectively. We present an eight-point recommendation for AP(ai)Bias 2.0 minimization. IEEE