Assessing parkinsonism & cerebellar dysfunction with spiral & line drawings

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Ideggyogyaszati Szemle-Clinical Neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI:10.18071/isz.77.0407
Attila Zoltán Jenei, István Valálik, Dávid Sztahó
{"title":"Assessing parkinsonism & cerebellar dysfunction with spiral & line drawings","authors":"Attila Zoltán Jenei, István Valálik, Dávid Sztahó","doi":"10.18071/isz.77.0407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Recognising neurological diseases is challenging without accurate diagnostic tools. Therefore, many approaches have been taken to recognise and evaluate these diseases through speech, movement, or drawing modalities.The purpose of the study is to compare the recognition of Parkinson’s and cerebellar symptoms using spiral and line drawings recorded from the same subjects. We also investigate the importance of pin pressure in classification. Furthermore, an attempt is made to use the two types of drawings together for more accurate classification.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Images were generated from the raw data with and without pressure data. We then performed classification with the help of pre-trained and own deep learning feature extraction models. Mann-Whitney U test is used to test the significance of the results with a 0.05 significance level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that spiral drawings significantly performed better than lines (p-value: 0.001). Furthermore, combining the two types of drawings improves recognition when pressure is available (p-value: 0.017). However, no performance degradation can be expected without pressure data using one drawing task (p-value: 0.507).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The spiral is recommended as the primary drawing, but combining multiple drawings can contribute to a more confident recognition. By excluding pressure, no significant decrease is expected in the model’s performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":50394,"journal":{"name":"Ideggyogyaszati Szemle-Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"77 11-12","pages":"407-415"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ideggyogyaszati Szemle-Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18071/isz.77.0407","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: Recognising neurological diseases is challenging without accurate diagnostic tools. Therefore, many approaches have been taken to recognise and evaluate these diseases through speech, movement, or drawing modalities.The purpose of the study is to compare the recognition of Parkinson’s and cerebellar symptoms using spiral and line drawings recorded from the same subjects. We also investigate the importance of pin pressure in classification. Furthermore, an attempt is made to use the two types of drawings together for more accurate classification.

Methods: Images were generated from the raw data with and without pressure data. We then performed classification with the help of pre-trained and own deep learning feature extraction models. Mann-Whitney U test is used to test the significance of the results with a 0.05 significance level.

Results: The results showed that spiral drawings significantly performed better than lines (p-value: 0.001). Furthermore, combining the two types of drawings improves recognition when pressure is available (p-value: 0.017). However, no performance degradation can be expected without pressure data using one drawing task (p-value: 0.507).

Conclusion: The spiral is recommended as the primary drawing, but combining multiple drawings can contribute to a more confident recognition. By excluding pressure, no significant decrease is expected in the model’s performance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用螺旋和线形图评估帕金森病和小脑功能障碍。
背景和目的:在没有准确诊断工具的情况下识别神经系统疾病是具有挑战性的。因此,已经采取了许多方法来通过言语、运动或绘画方式来识别和评估这些疾病。这项研究的目的是比较帕金森症和小脑症状的识别,使用从同一受试者记录的螺旋图和线形图。我们还研究了针压在分类中的重要性。此外,为了更准确地分类,我们尝试将两种类型的图纸一起使用。方法:从原始数据中生成图像,并在没有压力数据的情况下生成图像。然后,我们在预训练和自己的深度学习特征提取模型的帮助下进行分类。采用Mann-Whitney U检验检验结果的显著性,显著性水平为0.05。结果:螺旋图显著优于直线图(p值:0.001)。此外,在有压力的情况下,结合两种类型的图纸可以提高识别能力(p值:0.017)。然而,如果没有使用一个绘图任务的压力数据,则不会预期性能下降(p值:0.507)。结论:推荐以螺旋图为主要图,但多幅图结合可使识别更有信心。通过排除压力,预计模型的性能不会显著下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ideggyogyaszati Szemle-Clinical Neuroscience
Ideggyogyaszati Szemle-Clinical Neuroscience CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of Clinical Neuroscience (Ideggyógyászati Szemle) is to provide a forum for the exchange of clinical and scientific information for a multidisciplinary community. The Clinical Neuroscience will be of primary interest to neurologists, neurosurgeons, psychiatrist and clinical specialized psycholigists, neuroradiologists and clinical neurophysiologists, but original works in basic or computer science, epidemiology, pharmacology, etc., relating to the clinical practice with involvement of the central nervous system are also welcome.
期刊最新文献
Corticobasal degeneration: An update [Joint guideline of the Headache Working  Group of the Hungarian Headache Society (MFT) and the Hungarian Pain Society (MOFT) for the practical care of acute and chronic migraine]. [Long COVID - neurological or somatoform disease?] [Psychological profiles of chronic pain patients: exploring risk factors of illness behaviour through cluster analysis]. Assessing parkinsonism & cerebellar dysfunction with spiral & line drawings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1