Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review

Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the leading infectious causes of death worldwide. The effective management and public health control of this disease depends on early detection and careful treatment monitoring. For many years, the microscopy-based analysis of sputum smears has been the most common method...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marios Zachariou, Ognjen Arandjelović, Derek James Sloan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2023-09-01
Series:BioMedInformatics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7426/3/3/47
_version_ 1797581132404883456
author Marios Zachariou
Ognjen Arandjelović
Derek James Sloan
author_facet Marios Zachariou
Ognjen Arandjelović
Derek James Sloan
author_sort Marios Zachariou
collection DOAJ
description Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the leading infectious causes of death worldwide. The effective management and public health control of this disease depends on early detection and careful treatment monitoring. For many years, the microscopy-based analysis of sputum smears has been the most common method to detect and quantify <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> (Mtb) bacteria. Nonetheless, this form of analysis is a challenging procedure since sputum examination can only be reliably performed by trained personnel with rigorous quality control systems in place. Additionally, it is affected by subjective judgement. Furthermore, although fluorescence-based sample staining methods have made the procedure easier in recent years, the microscopic examination of sputum is a time-consuming operation. Over the past two decades, attempts have been made to automate this practice. Most approaches have focused on establishing an automated method of diagnosis, while others have centred on measuring the bacterial load or detecting and localising Mtb cells for further research on the phenotypic characteristics of their morphology. The literature has incorporated machine learning (ML) and computer vision approaches as part of the methodology to achieve these goals. In this review, we first gathered publicly available TB sputum smear microscopy image sets and analysed the disparities in these datasets. Thereafter, we analysed the most common evaluation metrics used to assess the efficacy of each method in its particular field. Finally, we generated comprehensive summaries of prior work on ML and deep learning (DL) methods for automated TB detection, including a review of their limitations.
first_indexed 2024-03-10T23:00:49Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ded4823a9d8a48f0bcf08e0075ac8d60
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2673-7426
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-10T23:00:49Z
publishDate 2023-09-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series BioMedInformatics
spelling doaj.art-ded4823a9d8a48f0bcf08e0075ac8d602023-11-19T09:43:39ZengMDPI AGBioMedInformatics2673-74262023-09-013372475110.3390/biomedinformatics3030047Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature ReviewMarios Zachariou0Ognjen Arandjelović1Derek James Sloan2School of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9SX, UKSchool of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9SX, UKSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9AJ, UKTuberculosis (TB) is one of the leading infectious causes of death worldwide. The effective management and public health control of this disease depends on early detection and careful treatment monitoring. For many years, the microscopy-based analysis of sputum smears has been the most common method to detect and quantify <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> (Mtb) bacteria. Nonetheless, this form of analysis is a challenging procedure since sputum examination can only be reliably performed by trained personnel with rigorous quality control systems in place. Additionally, it is affected by subjective judgement. Furthermore, although fluorescence-based sample staining methods have made the procedure easier in recent years, the microscopic examination of sputum is a time-consuming operation. Over the past two decades, attempts have been made to automate this practice. Most approaches have focused on establishing an automated method of diagnosis, while others have centred on measuring the bacterial load or detecting and localising Mtb cells for further research on the phenotypic characteristics of their morphology. The literature has incorporated machine learning (ML) and computer vision approaches as part of the methodology to achieve these goals. In this review, we first gathered publicly available TB sputum smear microscopy image sets and analysed the disparities in these datasets. Thereafter, we analysed the most common evaluation metrics used to assess the efficacy of each method in its particular field. Finally, we generated comprehensive summaries of prior work on ML and deep learning (DL) methods for automated TB detection, including a review of their limitations.https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7426/3/3/47microscopymachine learning<i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>automated medical diagnosiscell detectionfluorescence
spellingShingle Marios Zachariou
Ognjen Arandjelović
Derek James Sloan
Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
BioMedInformatics
microscopy
machine learning
<i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>
automated medical diagnosis
cell detection
fluorescence
title Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
title_full Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
title_fullStr Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
title_full_unstemmed Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
title_short Automated Methods for Tuberculosis Detection/Diagnosis: A Literature Review
title_sort automated methods for tuberculosis detection diagnosis a literature review
topic microscopy
machine learning
<i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>
automated medical diagnosis
cell detection
fluorescence
url https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7426/3/3/47
work_keys_str_mv AT marioszachariou automatedmethodsfortuberculosisdetectiondiagnosisaliteraturereview
AT ognjenarandjelovic automatedmethodsfortuberculosisdetectiondiagnosisaliteraturereview
AT derekjamessloan automatedmethodsfortuberculosisdetectiondiagnosisaliteraturereview