dc.contributor.author | Rufino, Jesús | |
dc.contributor.author | Ramirez, Juan Marcos | |
dc.contributor.author | Aguilar, Jose | |
dc.contributor.author | Baquero, Carlos | |
dc.contributor.author | Champati, Jaya Prakash | |
dc.contributor.author | Lillo, Rosa Elvira | |
dc.contributor.author | Fernández Anta, Antonio | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-07-05T11:39:27Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-07-05T11:39:27Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-09-01 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12761/1712 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background:
During the global pandemic crisis, various detection methods of COVID-19-positive cases based on self-reported information were introduced to provide quick diagnosis tools for effectively planning and managing healthcare resources. These methods typically identify positive cases based on a particular combination of symptoms, and they have been evaluated using different datasets.
Purpose:
This paper presents a comprehensive comparison of various COVID-19 detection methods based on self-reported information using the University of Maryland Global COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey (UMD-CTIS), a large health surveillance platform, which was launched in partnership with Facebook.
Methods:
Detection methods were implemented to identify COVID-19-positive cases among UMD-CTIS participants reporting at least one symptom and a recent antigen test result (positive or negative) for six countries and two periods. Multiple detection methods were implemented for three different categories: rule-based approaches, logistic regression techniques, and tree-based machine-learning models. These methods were evaluated using different metrics including F1-score, sensitivity, specificity, and precision. An explainability analysis has also been conducted to compare methods.
Results:
Fifteen methods were evaluated for six countries and two periods. We identify the best method for each category: rule-based methods (F1-score: 51.48\% - 71.11\%), logistic regression techniques (F1-score: 39.91\% - 71.13\%), and tree-based machine learning models (F1-score: 45.07\% - 73.72\%). According to the explainability analysis, the relevance of the reported symptoms in COVID-19 detection varies between countries and years. However, there are two variables consistently relevant across approaches: stuffy or runny nose, and aches or muscle pain.
Conclusions:
Regarding the categories of detection methods, evaluating detection methods using homogeneous data across countries and years provides a solid and consistent comparison. An explainability analysis of a tree-based machine-learning model can assist in identifying infected individuals specifically based on their relevant symptoms. This study is limited by the self-report nature of data, which cannot replace clinical diagnosis. | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Community of Madrid | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation | es |
dc.language.iso | eng | es |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | es |
dc.title | Consistent Comparison of Symptom-based Methods for COVID-19 Infection Detection | es |
dc.type | journal article | es |
dc.journal.title | International Journal of Medical Informatics | es |
dc.rights.accessRights | embargoed access | es |
dc.volume.number | 177 | es |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105133 | es |
dc.relation.projectName | SocialProbing | es |
dc.relation.projectName | COMODIN-CM | es |
dc.relation.projectName | CoronaSurveys-CM | es |
dc.subject.keyword | COVID-19 Detection Methods | es |
dc.subject.keyword | Explainability Analysis | es |
dc.subject.keyword | F1-score | es |
dc.subject.keyword | Logistic Regression Methods | es |
dc.subject.keyword | Rule-based Methods | es |
dc.subject.keyword | Tree-based Models | es |
dc.description.refereed | TRUE | es |
dc.description.status | pub | es |