Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 16, 2025
DNA Virus Detection System Based on RPA-CRISPR/Cas12a-SPM and Deep Learning
Published on: May 10, 2024
Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Detection of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Temitope Emmanuel Komolafe1, Yuzhu Cao1, Benedictor Alexander Nguchu1
1School of Biomedical Engineering (Suzhou) (T.E.K.,Y.C., H.S.), Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China; Department of Medical Imaging (T.E.K.,Y.C., H.S., J.Z., X.Y.), Suzhou Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Suzhou, 215163, China; Hefei National Lab for Physical Sciences at the Microscale and Centres for Biomedical Engineering (B.A.N.), University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China; EasySignal Group, Department of Automation (P.M.), Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China; Department of Biomedical Engineering (E.O.O.), Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, 518060, China; Jinhua Laboratory (X.Y.), Foshan, 528000, China.
Rationale And Objective:
To perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of deep learning (DL) in detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to investigate how network architecture and type of datasets affect DL performance.
Materials And Methods:
We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Inspec from January 1, 2020, to December 3, 2020, for retrospective and prospective studies on deep learning detection with at least reported sensitivity and specificity. Pooled DTA was obtained using random-effect models. Sub-group analysis between studies was also carried out for data source and network architectures.
Results:
The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88%, 93%; I2 = 69%) and 92% (95% CI: 88%, 94%; I2 = 88%), respectively for 19 studies. The pooled AUC and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and 112.5 (95% CI: 57.7, 219.3; I2 = 90%) respectively. The overall accuracy, recall, F1-score, LR+ and LR- are 89.5%, 89.5%, 89.7%, 23.13 and 0.13. Sub-group analysis shows that the sensitivity and DOR significantly vary with the type of network architectures and sources of data with low heterogeneity are (I2 = 0%) and (I2 = 18%) for ResNet architecture and single-source datasets, respectively.
Conclusion:
The diagnosis of COVID-19 via deep learning has achieved incredible performance, and the source of datasets, as well as network architectures, strongly affect DL performance.
