001     256018
005     20250129092417.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1109/TBME.2015.2479716
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a 0018-9294
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1558-2531
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a WOS:000375001600015
|2 WOS
037 _ _ |a FZJ-2015-06050
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Yao, Yu
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)144822
|b 0
|e Corresponding author
245 _ _ |a Multiple Vital-sign Based Infection Screening Outperforms Thermography Independent of the Classification Algorithm
260 _ _ |a New York, NY
|c 2015
|b IEEE
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1452496360_899
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
520 _ _ |a Goal: Thermography based infection screening at international airports plays an important role in the prevention of pandemics. However, studies show that thermography suffers from low sensitivity and specificity. To achieve higher screeningaccuracy, we developed a screening system based on the acquisition of multiple vital-signs. This multi-modal approach increases accuracy, but introduces the need for sophisticated classification methods. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the multi-modal approach to infection screening from a machine learning perspective. Methods: We conduct an empirical study applying six classification algorithms to measurements from the multi-modal screening system and comparing their performance among each other, as well as to the performance of thermography. In addition, we provide an information theoretic view on the use of multiple vital-signs for infection screening. The classification methods are tested using the same clinical data which has beenanalysed in our previous study using linear discriminant analysis. A total of 92 subjects were recruited for influenza screening using the system, consisting of 57 inpatients diagnosed to have seasonal influenza and 35 healthy controls. Results: Our study revealedthat the multi-modal screening system reduces the misclassification rate by more than 50% compared to thermography. At the same time, none of the multi-modal classifiers needed more than 6 ms for classification, which is negligible for practical purposes. Conclusion: Among the tested classifiers k-nearest neighbours, support vector machine and quadratic discriminant analysis achieved the highest cross-validated sensitivity score of 93%. Significance: Multi-modal infection screening might be able to address the shortcomings of thermography.
536 _ _ |a 574 - Theory, modelling and simulation (POF3-574)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-574
|c POF3-574
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef
700 1 _ |a Sun, Guanghao
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Matsui, Takemi
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Hakozaki, Yukiya
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 3
700 1 _ |a van Waasen, Stefan
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)142562
|b 4
|u fzj
700 1 _ |a Schiek, Michael
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)133935
|b 5
|u fzj
773 _ _ |a 10.1109/TBME.2015.2479716
|g p. 1 - 1
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2021742-0
|n 99
|p 1 - 1
|t IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering
|v vv
|y 2015
|x 1558-2531
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.pdf
|y Restricted
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.gif?subformat=icon
|x icon
|y Restricted
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.jpg?subformat=icon-1440
|x icon-1440
|y Restricted
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.jpg?subformat=icon-180
|x icon-180
|y Restricted
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.jpg?subformat=icon-640
|x icon-640
|y Restricted
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/256018/files/tbme-2015-yyao-authors-manuscript.pdf?subformat=pdfa
|x pdfa
|y Restricted
909 C O |o oai:juser.fz-juelich.de:256018
|p VDB
|p OpenAPC
|p openCost
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)144822
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 4
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)142562
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 5
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)133935
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Key Technologies
|l Decoding the Human Brain
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-570
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-574
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-500
|v Theory, modelling and simulation
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
914 1 _ |y 2015
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b IEEE T BIO-MED ENG : 2014
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0310
|2 StatID
|b NCBI Molecular Biology Database
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Thomson Reuters Master Journal List
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0110
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1030
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Life Sciences
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1160
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Engineering, Computing and Technology
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
920 _ _ |l yes
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-Juel1)ZEA-2-20090406
|k ZEA-2
|l Zentralinstitut für Elektronik
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)ZEA-2-20090406
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED
980 _ _ |a APC
981 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)PGI-4-20110106


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21