Skip to main content

Table 1 Method comparison and ablation experiment on different datasets

From: Evaluation of lung involvement in COVID-19 pneumonia based on ultrasound images

Method S (%) S&M (%) S&M&P (%)
Acc PP Se Sp Acc PP Se Sp Acc PP Se Sp
Method comparison
 VGG [20] 93.15 73.07 74.62 96.09 89.87 76.36 73.05 94.06 88.81 73.5 67.37 93.19
 ResNet [21] 93.19 73.56 75.55 96.06 90.63 77.77 74.94 94.51 89.41 74.56 68.78 93.56
 ResNeXt (baseline) [22] 93.15 77.82 74.62 96.31 91.7 79.98 77.57 94.94 90.46 75.92 70.9 94.04
 SENet-50 [23] 92.5 72.16 73.33 95.65 93.64 83.16 83.74 96.28 92.37 79.71 75.93 95.33
 SKNet-50 [24] 92.8 86.32 76.97 95.79 92.12 80.45 78.63 95.4 91.03 77.21 72.55 94.55
Ablation experiment
 w/o. CRFA and w/o. fusion module 93.15 77.82 74.62 96.31 91.7 79.98 77.57 94.94 90.46 75.92 70.9 94.04
 w/o. CRFA module 93.19 78.09 75.55 96.34 92.12 81.21 78.63 95.17 90.93 77.14 71.94 94.3
 MCRFNet 97.73 85.72 88.06 98.69 96.25 87.2 83.59 97.74 94.39 82.28 76.27 96.44
  1. S Stork dataset accuracy, M Mindray dataset accuracy, P Philips dataset accuracy, Acc accuracy, PP precision, Se sensitivity, Sp specificity