Cited by 9COVID-19 diagnosis using AICOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesMachine Learning in Healthcare

Development and validation of a multimodal-based prognosis and intervention prediction model for COVID-19 patients in a multicenter cohort

Open access
Lee, Jeong Hoon, Ahn, Jong Seok, Chung, Myung Jin, Jeong, Yeon Joo, Kim, Jin Hwan, Lim, Jae Kwang, Kim, Jin Young, Kim, Young Jae +2 more·2022·Sensors

Abstract

The ability to accurately predict the prognosis and intervention requirements for treating highly infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, can greatly support the effective management of patients, especially in resource-limited settings. The aim of the study is to develop and validate a multimodal artificial intelligence (AI) system using clinical findings, laboratory data and AI-interpreted features of chest X-rays (CXRs), and to predict the prognosis and the required interventions for patients diagnosed with COVID-19, using multi-center data. In total, 2282 real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 patients’ initial clinical findings, laboratory data and CXRs were retrospectively collected from 13 medical centers in South Korea, between January 2020 and June 2021. The prognostic outcomes collected included intensive care unit (ICU) admission and in-hospital mortality. Intervention outcomes included the use of oxygen (O2) supplementation, mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A deep learning algorithm detecting 10 common CXR abnormalities (DLAD-10) was used to infer the initial CXR taken. A random forest model with a quantile classifier was used to predict the prognostic and intervention outcomes, using multimodal data. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) values for the single-modal model, using clinical findings, laboratory data and the outputs from DLAD-10, were 0.742 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.696−0.788), 0.794 (0.745−0.843) and 0.770 (0.724−0.815), respectively. The AUROC of the combined model, using clinical findings, laboratory data and DLAD-10 outputs, was significantly higher at 0.854 (0.820−0.889) than that of all other models (p < 0.001, using DeLong’s test). In the order of importance, age, dyspnea, consolidation and fever were significant clinical variables for prediction. The most predictive DLAD-10 output was consolidation. We have shown that a multimodal AI model can improve the performance of predicting both the prognosis and intervention in COVID-19 patients, and this could assist in effective treatment and subsequent resource management. Further, image feature extraction using an established AI engine with well-defined clinical outputs, and combining them with different modes of clinical data, could be a useful way of creating an understandable multimodal prediction model.

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 · 10.3390/s22135007

Cites

48 of 48 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?

  • Retrospective validation on 2282 COVID-19 patients from 13 medical centers demonstrated that the Lee et al. (2022) multimodal model significantly outperformed the unimodal imaging model with an AUC of 0.854 vs. 0.770.

    “Retrospective validation on 2282 COVID-19 patients from 13 medical centers demonstrated that the multimodal model significantly outperformed the unimodal imaging model with an AUC of 0.854 vs. 0.770, respectively.”

    From Navigating the landscape of multimodal AI in medicine: A scoping review on technical challenges and clinical applications (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2022

    Results §4.2 reports that the multimodal model significantly outperformed the CXR-based model for predicting all adverse events (AUROC 0.854 vs. 0.770; p < 0.001). The study was retrospective, but Results §4.1 says 2282 patients from 13 centers comprised the full dataset; the held-out validation set contained 551 patients from 5 centers, not 2282 patients. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A feature importance analysis revealed that clinical variables such as age and dyspnea played an essential role in the Lee et al. (2022) multimodal model's prediction.

    “A feature importance analysis revealed that, among others, clinical variables such as age and dyspnea played an essential role in the multimodal model's prediction.”
  • Lee et al. (2022) focused on developing and validating a multimodal prognosis and treatment selection model in COVID-19 patients.

    “Second, Lee et al. (2022) focused on developing and validating a multimodal prognosis and treatment selection model in COVID-19 patients.”

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: 1

  1. [34]Shams A.B. Raihan M.M.S. Khan M.M.U. Preo R.B. Monjur O. Telehealthcare and COVID-19: A Noninvasive & Low Cost Invasive, Scalable and Multimodal Real-Time Smartphone Application for Early Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection arXiv 2021 2109.07846

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, J. H., Ahn, J. S., Chung, M. J., Jeong, Y. J., Kim, J. H., Lim, J. K., Kim, J. Y., Kim, Y. J., Lee, J. E., & Kim, E. Y.
Affiliations
  • Chonnam National University Hospital (KR)
  • Lunit (South Korea) (KR)
  • Samsung Medical Center (KR)
  • Pusan National University Hospital (KR)
  • Chungnam National University (KR)
  • Kyungpook National University Hospital (KR)
  • Gachon University (KR)
Corresponding author
  • Lee, Jong Eun
  • Kim, Eun Young
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-07-02
Volume
22
Issue
13
Pages
5007
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283810499
Cited by
9
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • information and Communications Promotion Fund (ICT promotion fund) (FRD2021-11)
  • National IT industry Promotion Agency (NIPA) (FRD2021-11)
  • Ministry of Science and ICD (MSIT), Republic of Korea (FRD2021-11)
  • Gachon University Gil Medical Center (FRD2021-11)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, outcome prediction, intervention prediction, multimodal AI, chest X-ray abnormalities, deep learning, random forest, intensive care unit admission, in-hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, supplemental oxygen, laboratory findings, clinical features, resource management, South Korea, multicenter cohort, feature importance, resource-limited settings
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies

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