Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 425

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

Pneumonia detection in chest X-ray images using an ensemble of deep learning models

Open access
Kundu, Rohit, Das, Ritacheta, Geem, Zong Woo, Han, Gi-Tae, Sarkar, Ram·2021·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Pneumonia is a respiratory infection caused by bacteria or viruses; it affects many individuals, especially in developing and underdeveloped nations, where high levels of pollution, unhygienic living conditions, and overcrowding are relatively common, together with inadequate medical infrastructure. Pneumonia causes pleural effusion, a condition in which fluids fill the lung, causing respiratory difficulty. Early diagnosis of pneumonia is crucial to ensure curative treatment and increase survival rates. Chest X-ray imaging is the most frequently used method for diagnosing pneumonia. However, the examination of chest X-rays is a challenging task and is prone to subjective variability. In this study, we developed a computer-aided diagnosis system for automatic pneumonia detection using chest X-ray images. We employed deep transfer learning to handle the scarcity of available data and designed an ensemble of three convolutional neural network models: GoogLeNet, ResNet-18, and DenseNet-121. A weighted average ensemble technique was adopted, wherein the weights assigned to the base learners were determined using a novel approach. The scores of four standard evaluation metrics, precision, recall, f1-score, and the area under the curve, are fused to form the weight vector, which in studies in the literature was frequently set experimentally, a method that is prone to error. The proposed approach was evaluated on two publicly available pneumonia X-ray datasets, provided by Kermany et al. and the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), respectively, using a five-fold cross-validation scheme. The proposed method achieved accuracy rates of 98.81% and 86.85% and sensitivity rates of 98.80% and 87.02% on the Kermany and RSNA datasets, respectively. The results were superior to those of state-of-the-art methods and our method performed better than the widely used ensemble techniques. Statistical analyses on the datasets using McNemar’s and ANOVA tests showed the robustness of the approach. The codes for the proposed work are available at https://github.com/Rohit-Kundu/Ensemble-Pneumonia-Detection.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0256630

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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

1 retracted

Show all 41 references

Metadata

Authors
Kundu, R., Das, R., Geem, Z. W., Han, G.-T., & Sarkar, R.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2021-09-07
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
e0256630
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3198276338
Cited by
425
References
41
FWCI
32.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pneumonia detection in chest X-ray images using an ensemble of deep learning models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0256630
The paper
Kundu, R., Das, R., Geem, Z. W., Han, G.-T., & Sarkar, R. (2021). Pneumonia detection in chest X-ray images using an ensemble of deep learning models. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256630

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.