CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 179COVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesCOVID-19 diagnosis using AISARS-CoV-2 detection and testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

COVID-19 diagnosis by routine blood tests using machine learning

Open access
Kukar, Matjaž, Gunčar, Gregor, Vovko, Tomaž, Podnar, Simon, Černelč, Peter, Brvar, Miran, Zalaznik, Mateja, Notar, Mateja, Moškon, Sašo, Notar, Marko·2021·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.1038/s41598-021-90265-9PMC PMC8144373
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Physicians taking care of patients with COVID-19 have described different changes in routine blood parameters. However, these changes hinder them from performing COVID-19 diagnoses. We constructed a machine learning model for COVID-19 diagnosis that was based and cross-validated on the routine blood tests of 5333 patients with various bacterial and viral infections, and 160 COVID-19-positive patients. We selected the operational ROC point at a sensitivity of 81.9% and a specificity of 97.9%. The cross-validated AUC was 0.97. The five most useful routine blood parameters for COVID-19 diagnosis according to the feature importance scoring of the XGBoost algorithm were: MCHC, eosinophil count, albumin, INR, and prothrombin activity percentage. t-SNE visualization showed that the blood parameters of the patients with a severe COVID-19 course are more like the parameters of a bacterial than a viral infection. The reported diagnostic accuracy is at least comparable and probably complementary to RT-PCR and chest CT studies. Patients with fever, cough, myalgia, and other symptoms can now have initial routine blood tests assessed by our diagnostic tool. All patients with a positive COVID-19 prediction would then undergo standard RT-PCR studies to confirm the diagnosis. We believe that our results represent a significant contribution to improvements in COVID-19 diagnosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-021-90265-9

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 A flow chart of patients included in the model building and validation process.
Figure 1 A flow chart of patients included in the model building and validation process.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Blood parameters sorted by their XGBoost importance score. More important parameters are shown on the left. Group median values and IQR of the blood parameters used in model building are shown, centered, and scaled to reference intervals. Median bar for the C-reactive protein in bacterial infections is out of the scale at 38 mg/L. Groups (COVID-19/other virus/bacteria) were evaluated by the Anderson–Darling test. The significance levels (0.05 or 0.01) of the test results are depicted at the bottom of the figure.
Figure 2 Blood parameters sorted by their XGBoost importance score. More important parameters are shown on the left. Group median values and IQR of the blood parameters used in model building are shown, centered, and scaled to reference intervals. Median bar for the C-reactive protein in bacterial infections is out of the scale at 38 mg/L. Groups (COVID-19/other virus/bacteria) were evaluated by the Anderson–Darling test. The significance levels (0.05 or 0.01) of the test results are depicted at the bottom of the figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Visualization of bacteria/virus/COVID-19 parameter space with t-SNE method. Each dot represents a patient or more specifically, an embedding of his/her blood parameters into a two-dimensional space, and its color represents the group. Blue dots represent patients with viral infections other than COVID-19, orange dots patients with bacterial infections and red dots patients with COVID-19. Green dots in panel (a) represent COVID-19 patients who died (10 patients) and in panel (b) COVID-19 patients diagnosed with acute respiratory failure (38 patients). Medoids of bacteria/virus/COVID-19/”COVID-19 death” groups on panel (a) and bacteria/virus/COVID-19/”COVID-19 ARF” groups on panel (b) are also marked.
Figure 3 Visualization of bacteria/virus/COVID-19 parameter space with t-SNE method. Each dot represents a patient or more specifically, an embedding of his/her blood parameters into a two-dimensional space, and its color represents the group. Blue dots represent patients with viral infections other than COVID-19, orange dots patients with bacterial infections and red dots patients with COVID-19. Green dots in panel (a) represent COVID-19 patients who died (10 patients) and in panel (b) COVID-19 patients diagnosed with acute respiratory failure (38 patients). Medoids of bacteria/virus/COVID-19/”COVID-19 death” groups on panel (a) and bacteria/virus/COVID-19/”COVID-19 ARF” groups on panel (b) are also marked.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 ROC, PR (precision-recall), and F2 curves for COVID-19 diagnosis calculated from the training data using ten-fold stratified cross-validation. Vertical and horizontal dashed lines connect the F2 (gray) max point with the PR curve (orange) and the ROC curve (blue) in order to obtain the operational ROC point with sensitivity = 0.819, specificity = 0.979 (depicted with red dots), and AUC = 0.97.
Figure 4 ROC, PR (precision-recall), and F2 curves for COVID-19 diagnosis calculated from the training data using ten-fold stratified cross-validation. Vertical and horizontal dashed lines connect the F2 (gray) max point with the PR curve (orange) and the ROC curve (blue) in order to obtain the operational ROC point with sensitivity = 0.819, specificity = 0.979 (depicted with red dots), and AUC = 0.97.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Nielsen, D. Tree boosting with XGBoost – why does XGBoost win “every” machine learning competition? [Master’s thesis] (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2016).
  2. Flach, P., Hernández-Orallo, J. & Ferri, C. A coherent interpretation of AUC as a measure of aggregated classification performance. In The 28th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML’11 (eds Getoor, L. & Scheffer, T.) 657–664 (Omnipress, 2011).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 179

Related

Metadata

Authors
Kukar, M., Gunčar, G., Vovko, T., Podnar, S., Černelč, P., Brvar, M., Zalaznik, M., Notar, M., Moškon, S., & Notar, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Ljubljana (SI)
  • Ljubljana University Medical Centre (SI)
Corresponding author
  • Notar, Mateja
  • Notar, Marko
ORCID
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-05-24
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
10738-10738
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41598-021-90265-9
PMC
PMC8144373
OpenAlex
W3033612360
Cited by
179
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 27
FWCI
11.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Smart Blood Analytics Swiss SA
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Keywords
COVID-19 diagnosis, routine blood tests, machine learning, XGBoost, feature importance, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, eosinophil count, albumin, international normalized ratio, prothrombin activity, t-SNE visualization, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Aged, Eosinophils, Female, Hematologic Tests, Humans, Male, Prothrombin, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Serum Albumin, Severity of Illness Index, Thorax, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Biomarkers, Area Under Curve

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review