Discrete-Event Simulation in Healthcare Settings: a Review
Authors:
John J. Forbus,
Daniel Berleant
Abstract:
We review and define the current state of the art as relating to discrete event simulation in healthcare-related systems. A review of published literature over the past five years (2017 - 2021) was conducted, building upon previously published work. PubMed and EBSCOhost were searched for journal articles on discrete event simulation in healthcare resulting in identification of 933 unique articles.…
▽ More
We review and define the current state of the art as relating to discrete event simulation in healthcare-related systems. A review of published literature over the past five years (2017 - 2021) was conducted, building upon previously published work. PubMed and EBSCOhost were searched for journal articles on discrete event simulation in healthcare resulting in identification of 933 unique articles. Of these about half were excluded at the title/abstract level and 154 at the full text level, leaving 311 papers to analyze. These were categorized, then analyzed by category and collectively to identify publication volume over time, disease focus, activity levels by coun-try, software systems used, and sizes of healthcare unit under study. A total of 1196 articles were initially identified. This list was narrowed down to 311 for systematic review. Following the schema from prior systematic reviews, the articles fell into four broad categories: health care sys-tems operations (HCSO), disease progression modeling (DPM), screening modeling (SM), and health behavior modeling (HBM). We found that discrete event simulation in healthcare has con-tinued to increase year-over-year, as well as expand into diverse areas of the healthcare system. In addition, this study adds extra bibliometric dimensions to gain more insight into the details and nuances of how and where simulation is being used in healthcare.
△ Less
Submitted 20 October, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
Discovering Limitations of Image Quality Assessments with Noised Deep Learning Image Sets
Authors:
Wei Dai,
Daniel Berleant
Abstract:
Image quality is important, and can affect overall performance in image processing and computer vision as well as for numerous other reasons. Image quality assessment (IQA) is consequently a vital task in different applications from aerial photography interpretation to object detection to medical image analysis. In previous research, the BRISQUE algorithm and the PSNR algorithm were evaluated with…
▽ More
Image quality is important, and can affect overall performance in image processing and computer vision as well as for numerous other reasons. Image quality assessment (IQA) is consequently a vital task in different applications from aerial photography interpretation to object detection to medical image analysis. In previous research, the BRISQUE algorithm and the PSNR algorithm were evaluated with high resolution (atleast 512x384 pixels), but relatively small image sets (no more than 4,744 images). However, scientists have not evaluated IQA algorithms on low resolution (no more than 32x32 pixels), multi-perturbation, big image sets (for example, tleast 60,000 different images not counting their perturbations). This study explores these two IQA algorithms through experimental investigation. We first chose two deep learning image sets, CIFAR-10 and MNIST. Then, we added 68 perturbations that add noise to the images in specific sequences and noise intensities. In addition, we tracked the performance outputs of the two IQA algorithms with singly and multiply noised images. After quantitatively analyzing experimental results, we report the limitations of the two IQAs with these noised CIFAR-10 and MNIST image sets. We also explain three potential root causes for performance degradation. These findings point out weaknesses of the two IQA algorithms. The research results provide guidance to scientists and engineers developing accurate, robust IQA algorithms. All source codes, related image sets, and figures are shared on the website (https://github.com/caperock/imagequality) to support future scientific and industrial projects.
△ Less
Submitted 29 January, 2023; v1 submitted 18 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
