Cited by 104Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

A Comparison of Transfer Learning Performance Versus Health Experts in Disease Diagnosis from Medical Imaging

Open access
Malik, Hassaan, Farooq, Muhammad Shoaib, Khelifi, Adel, Abid, Adnan, Nasir Qureshi, Junaid, Hussain, Muzammil·2020·IEEE Access

Abstract

Deep learning methods have huge success in task specific feature representation. Transfer learning algorithms are very much effective when large training data is scarce. It has been significantly used for diagnosis of diseases in medical imaging. This article presents a systematic literature review (SLR) by conducting a comparison of a variety of transfer learning approaches with healthcare experts in diagnosing diseases from medical imaging. This study has been compiled by reviewing research studies published in renowned venues between 2014 and 2019. Moreover, the data for the diagnosis performed by health care experts has also been acquired to perform a detailed comparative analysis for a wide range of diseases. The analysis has been performed on the basis of diseases, transfer learning approaches, type of medical imaging used. The comparative analysis is based on performance indices reported in studies which include diagnostic accuracy, true-positive (TP), false-positive (FP), true-negative (TN), false-negative (FN) sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). A total of5,188articles were identified out of which 63 studies were included. Among them 21 research studies contain sufficient data to construct the evaluation tables that enable process of test accuracy of transfer learning having sensitivity ranged from 71% to 100% (mean 85.25%) and specificity ranged from 64% to 100% (mean 81.92%). Furthermore, health experts having sensitivity ranged from 33% to 100% (mean 85.27%) and specificity ranged from 82% to 100% (mean 91.63%).This SLR found that diagnostic accuracy of transfer learning is approximately equivalent to the diagnosis of health experts. The results also revealed that convolutional neural networks (CNN) have been extensively used for disease diagnosis from medical imaging. Finally, inappropriate exposure of diseases in transfer learning studies restricts reliable elucidation of the outcomes of diagnostic accuracy.

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 · 10.1109/access.2020.3004766

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Articles were excluded based on criteria: not based on binary disease classification; diagnosing brain tumors without medical images; not identifying data sources or employing ambiguous methods of data collection; based on non-human samples.

    “Articles were excluded based on the following criteria [21]: Research articles not based on binary disease classification.Research articles diagnosing brain tumors without medical images.Research articles not identifying data sources or employing ambiguous methods of data collection.Research articles based on non-human samples.”
  • Classification of abnormal MR images into different tumor categories is still a challenging task.

    “However, the classification of these abnormal images into different tumor categories is still a challenging task [21].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. G. E. Hinton, L. Deng, D. Yu, G. E. Dahl, A.-R. Mohamed, N. Jaitly, A. Senior, V. Vanhoucke, P. Nguyen, T. N. Sainath, and B. Kingsbury, ''Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition,'' IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 82-97, Oct. 2012.
  2. J. Olczak, N. Fahlberg, A. Maki, A. S. Razavian, A. Jilert, A. Stark, O. Sköldenberg, and M. Gordon, ''Arti- ficial intelligence for analyzing orthopedic trauma radio- graphs,'' Acta Orthopaedica, vol. 88, no. 6, pp. 581-586, Nov. 2017.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Malik, H., Farooq, M. S., Khelifi, A., Abid, A., Nasir Qureshi, J., & Hussain, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Management and Technology (PK)
  • Abu Dhabi University (AE)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2020
Volume
8
Pages
139367-139386
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3037095325
Cited by
104
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 2
FWCI
5.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
transfer learning, diagnostic imaging, disease diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, convolutional neural networks, sensitivity and specificity, medical image classification

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