Evidence Hub

Accuracy of Deep Learning in Diagnosing Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Huiju Yang, Yi-Jiu Wu, Tong Wu, Jing-Yan Ji, Si Lei, Weibin Xu

Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2026

886,753 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common chronic lung disease. Deep learning (DL), a data-driven machine learning approach, has gained attention in clinical practice, particularly for diagnosing COPD and grading its severity. However, systematic evidence of its diagnostic and grading accuracy remains limited, posing challenges for developing intelligent diagnostic tools. Objective This study aimed to systematically estimate the accuracy of DL models for diagnosing and grading COPD, providing up-to-date evidence for the design and clinical implementation of intelligent detection tools. Methods The Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed were systematically searched for studies on DL for diagnosing COPD and grading its severity published up to November 1, 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Subgroup analyses by the validation set generation method and imaging data source were conducted, and meta-analyses were performed on the validation sets. For binary outcomes, diagnostic 2×2 tables were synthesized using a bivariate mixed effects model; for multiclass outcomes, accuracy estimates were pooled using random-effects models. Results In total, 56 studies comprising 886,753 participants were included. Inputs were computed tomography (CT) imaging (n=30), breath sounds or audio (n=12), conventional chest X-ray (n=2), X-ray film (n=2), and other modalities (n=10),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 886,753 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free