Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42475730›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

A 3-Tier AI Model for COVID-19 Triage Using Pharyngeal Images: Algorithm Development and Validation.

Sho Okiyama, Tomonori Aoki, Memori Fukuda, Yuji Ariyasu, Saho Kameyama

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sho OkiyamaDepartment of Digital Health, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8571, Japan, +81 90 6522 4161.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6087-7865
Tomonori AokiFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0794-9940
Memori FukudaAillis, Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3860-9316
Yuji AriyasuAillis, Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-6890-4831
Saho KameyamaAillis, Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-7598-7386

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: SARS-CoV-2 remains a common cause of acute respiratory illness; however, symptom-based triage poorly discriminates it from other febrile conditions. A recently developed artificial intelligence (AI)-powered pharyngeal camera acquires pharyngeal images and clinical data to assist in influenza diagnosis; leveraging this workflow, we evaluated an adjunct AI algorithm (COVID-19-AI) that reports high, medium, or low suspicion to guide whether SARS-CoV-2 testing should subsequently be performed. Objective: This study aimed to report diagnostic accuracy outcomes and clinical utility of the COVID-19-AI as a triage support tool. Methods: We conducted a performance evaluation using a prospectively collected multicenter dataset from 26 Japanese institutions between December 2023 and March 2024. Patients with suspected influenza or COVID-19 were eligible. The COVID-19-AI algorithm, a stacked ensemble of a Swin Transformer and boosting models, was developed using pharyngeal images combined with routine clinical variables from 2133 patients, and it produced a 3-tier output. Classification thresholds were predefined to optimize clinical rule-out and rule-in utilities. Diagnostic performance was assessed in 696 independent patients against centralized reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection under 2 prespecified operating criteria: inclusive (high or medium=positive and low=negative) and strict (high=positive and medium or low=negative). A subanalysis stratified accuracy by time from symptom onset (12-hour bins to 72 hours). Results: Among 696 analyzed participants (all Asian), 247 (35.5%) had reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The COVID-19-AI categorized 12.4% (n=86), 72.8% (n=507), and 14.8% (n=103) patients as high, medium, and low suspicion, respectively. Under the inclusive criteria, sensitivity of COVID-19-AI was 93.9% (95% CI 90.4%-96.4%), specificity was 19.6% (95% CI 16.1%-23.5%), and negative predictive value was 85.4% (95% CI 77.6%-91.3%). Under the strict criteria, sensitivity was 24.7% (95% CI 19.6%-30.4%), specificity was 94.4% (95% CI 92.0%-96.3%), and positive predictive value was 70.9% (95% CI 60.7%-79.8%). Across 12-hour onset strata, sensitivity under the inclusive criteria remained ≥92.0% and specificity under the strict criteria remained ≥83.3%; no pronounced temporal trend was observed. Additionally, an integrated model using both pharyngeal images and clinical variables (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] 0.78) outperformed models using only clinical variables (AUROC 0.75) or images alone (AUROC 0.71); feature importance analysis further confirmed that pharyngeal image information was the most influential individual predictor, providing greater predictive value than any single clinical variable. Conclusions: Embedded within AI-powered pharyngeal camera workflows, a 3-tier AI suspicion output enables complementary operating behaviors-high sensitivity to rule out COVID-19 (inclusive criteria) and high specificity to support immediate infection control measures (strict criteria), although these criteria involve inherent trade-offs with low specificity and low sensitivity, respectively. Performance stability across onset times suggests robustness to symptom chronology, offering a standardized tool for clinical triage.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceCOVID-19PharynxTriageFemaleHumansJapanMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSARS-CoV-2AIartificial intelligenceCOVID-19decision supportmachine visionpharyngeal images

Identifiers

PMID42475730
PMCPMC13384471

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.