Separation of stroke from vestibular neuritis using the video head impulse test: machine learning models versus expert clinicians.

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Neurology Pub Date : 2025-03-05 DOI:10.1007/s00415-025-12918-3
Chao Wang, Jeevan Sreerama, Benjamin Nham, Nicole Reid, Nese Ozalp, James O Thomas, Cecilia Cappelen-Smith, Zeljka Calic, Andrew P Bradshaw, Sally M Rosengren, Gülden Akdal, G Michael Halmagyi, Deborah A Black, David Burke, Mukesh Prasad, Gnana K Bharathy, Miriam S Welgampola
{"title":"Separation of stroke from vestibular neuritis using the video head impulse test: machine learning models versus expert clinicians.","authors":"Chao Wang, Jeevan Sreerama, Benjamin Nham, Nicole Reid, Nese Ozalp, James O Thomas, Cecilia Cappelen-Smith, Zeljka Calic, Andrew P Bradshaw, Sally M Rosengren, Gülden Akdal, G Michael Halmagyi, Deborah A Black, David Burke, Mukesh Prasad, Gnana K Bharathy, Miriam S Welgampola","doi":"10.1007/s00415-025-12918-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute vestibular syndrome usually represents either vestibular neuritis (VN), an innocuous viral illness, or posterior circulation stroke (PCS), a potentially life-threatening event. The video head impulse test (VHIT) is a quantitative measure of the vestibulo-ocular reflex that can distinguish between these two diagnoses. It can be rapidly performed at the bedside by any trained healthcare professional but requires interpretation by an expert clinician. We developed machine learning models to differentiate between PCS and VN using only the VHIT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We trained machine learning classification models using unedited head- and eye-velocity data from acute VHIT performed in an Emergency Room on patients presenting with acute vestibular syndrome and whose final diagnosis was VN or PCS. The models were validated using an independent test dataset collected at a second institution. We compared the performance of the models against expert clinicians as well as a widely used VHIT metric: the gain cutoff value.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The training and test datasets comprised 252 and 49 patients, respectively. In the test dataset, the best machine learning model identified VN with 87.8% (95% CI 77.6%-95.9%) accuracy. Model performance was not significantly different (p = 0.56) from that of blinded expert clinicians who achieved 85.7% accuracy (75.5%-93.9%) and was superior (p = 0.01) to that of the optimal gain cutoff value (75.5% accuracy (63.8%-85.7%)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machine learning models can effectively differentiate PCS from VN using only VHIT data, with comparable accuracy to expert clinicians. They hold promise as a tool to assist Emergency Room clinicians evaluating patients with acute vestibular syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":16558,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurology","volume":"272 3","pages":"248"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882619/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-12918-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute vestibular syndrome usually represents either vestibular neuritis (VN), an innocuous viral illness, or posterior circulation stroke (PCS), a potentially life-threatening event. The video head impulse test (VHIT) is a quantitative measure of the vestibulo-ocular reflex that can distinguish between these two diagnoses. It can be rapidly performed at the bedside by any trained healthcare professional but requires interpretation by an expert clinician. We developed machine learning models to differentiate between PCS and VN using only the VHIT.

Methods: We trained machine learning classification models using unedited head- and eye-velocity data from acute VHIT performed in an Emergency Room on patients presenting with acute vestibular syndrome and whose final diagnosis was VN or PCS. The models were validated using an independent test dataset collected at a second institution. We compared the performance of the models against expert clinicians as well as a widely used VHIT metric: the gain cutoff value.

Results: The training and test datasets comprised 252 and 49 patients, respectively. In the test dataset, the best machine learning model identified VN with 87.8% (95% CI 77.6%-95.9%) accuracy. Model performance was not significantly different (p = 0.56) from that of blinded expert clinicians who achieved 85.7% accuracy (75.5%-93.9%) and was superior (p = 0.01) to that of the optimal gain cutoff value (75.5% accuracy (63.8%-85.7%)).

Conclusion: Machine learning models can effectively differentiate PCS from VN using only VHIT data, with comparable accuracy to expert clinicians. They hold promise as a tool to assist Emergency Room clinicians evaluating patients with acute vestibular syndrome.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
使用视频头部脉冲测试分离中风与前庭神经炎:机器学习模型与专家临床医生。
背景:急性前庭综合征通常表现为前庭神经炎(VN),一种无害的病毒性疾病,或后循环卒中(PCS),一种潜在的危及生命的事件。视频头脉冲测试(VHIT)是前庭眼反射的定量测量,可以区分这两种诊断。它可以由任何训练有素的医疗保健专业人员在床边快速执行,但需要专家临床医生的解释。我们开发了机器学习模型,仅使用VHIT来区分pc和VN。方法:我们使用未经编辑的头部和眼球速度数据来训练机器学习分类模型,这些数据来自急诊室急性前庭综合征患者的急性VHIT,最终诊断为VN或PCS。这些模型使用在第二家机构收集的独立测试数据集进行验证。我们将模型的性能与专家临床医生以及广泛使用的VHIT指标进行了比较:增益截止值。结果:训练和测试数据集分别包括252例和49例患者。在测试数据集中,最佳机器学习模型识别VN的准确率为87.8% (95% CI 77.6%-95.9%)。模型性能与盲法专家临床医生的准确率为85.7%(75.5% ~ 93.9%)无显著差异(p = 0.56),优于最佳增益截止值(75.5% ~ 63.8% ~ 85.7%)(p = 0.01)。结论:机器学习模型可以仅使用VHIT数据有效区分PCS和VN,其准确性与专家临床医生相当。它们有望成为帮助急诊室临床医生评估急性前庭综合征患者的工具。
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
Journal of Neurology
Journal of Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
558
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurology is an international peer-reviewed journal which provides a source for publishing original communications and reviews on clinical neurology covering the whole field. In addition, Letters to the Editors serve as a forum for clinical cases and the exchange of ideas which highlight important new findings. A section on Neurological progress serves to summarise the major findings in certain fields of neurology. Commentaries on new developments in clinical neuroscience, which may be commissioned or submitted, are published as editorials. Every neurologist interested in the current diagnosis and treatment of neurological disorders needs access to the information contained in this valuable journal.
期刊最新文献
Treating SOD1-ALS with tofersen results in nonprogressive chronic ALS-a case series from Iceland. Alexander Robertson (1834-1908). Disrupted and reorganized connectivity of brain networks in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of resting-state functional MRI. Longitudinal myelin MR imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis: a narrative review. Association between leukocyte telomere length and neurodegenerative diseases: a prospective cohort in the UK Biobank.
×
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:604180095
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