Objectives: The rRT-PCR test, the current gold standard for the detection of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), presents with known shortcomings, such as long turnaround time, potential shortage of reagents, false-negative rates around 15–20%, and expensive equipment. The hematochemical values of routine blood exams could represent a faster and less expensive alternative. Methods: Three different training data set of hematochemical values from 1,624 patients (52% COVID-19 positive), admitted at San Raphael Hospital (OSR) from February to May 2020, were used for developing machine learning (ML) models: the complete OSR dataset (72 features: complete blood count (CBC), biochemical, coagulation, hemogasanalysis and CO-Oxymetry values, age, sex and specific symptoms at triage) and two sub-datasets (COVID-specific and CBC dataset, 32 and 21 features respectively). 58 cases (50% COVID-19 positive) from another hospital, and 54 negative patients collected in 2018 at OSR, were used for internal-external and external validation. Results: We developed five ML models: for the complete OSR dataset, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the algorithms ranged from 0.83 to 0.90; for the COVID-specific dataset from 0.83 to 0.87; and for the CBC dataset from 0.74 to 0.86. The validations also achieved good results: respectively, AUC from 0.75 to 0.78; and specificity from 0.92 to 0.96. Conclusions: ML can be applied to blood tests as both an adjunct and alternative method to rRT-PCR for the fast and cost-effective identification of COVID-19-positive patients. This is especially useful in developing countries, or in countries facing an increase in contagions.

Most current Artificial Intelligence applications are based on supervised Machine Learning (ML), which ultimately grounds on data annotated by small teams of experts or large ensemble of volunteers. The annotation process is often performed in terms of a majority vote, however this has been proved to be often problematic by recent evaluation studies. In this article, we describe and advocate for a different paradigm, which we call perspectivism: this counters the removal of disagreement and, consequently, the assumption of correctness of traditionally aggregated gold-standard datasets, and proposes the adoption of methods that preserve divergence of opinions and integrate multiple perspectives in the ground truthing process of ML development. Drawing on previous works which inspired it, mainly from the crowdsourcing and multi-rater labeling settings, we survey the state-of-the-art and describe the potential of our proposal for not only the more subjective tasks (e.g. those related to human language) but also those tasks commonly understood as objective (e.g. medical decision making). We present the main benefits of adopting a perspectivist stance in ML, as well as possible disadvantages, and various ways in which such a stance can be implemented in practice. Finally, we share a set of recommendations and outline a research agenda to advance the perspectivist stance in ML.