使用预分割深度学习分类模型对糖尿病视网膜病变进行分级:验证自动算法。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Acta Ophthalmologica Pub Date : 2024-10-19 DOI:10.1111/aos.16781
Dyllan Edson Similié, Jakob K H Andersen, Sebastian Dinesen, Thiusius R Savarimuthu, Jakob Grauslund
{"title":"使用预分割深度学习分类模型对糖尿病视网膜病变进行分级:验证自动算法。","authors":"Dyllan Edson Similié, Jakob K H Andersen, Sebastian Dinesen, Thiusius R Savarimuthu, Jakob Grauslund","doi":"10.1111/aos.16781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To validate the performance of autonomous diabetic retinopathy (DR) grading by comparing a human grader and a self-developed deep-learning (DL) algorithm with gold-standard evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 500, 6-field retinal images graded by an expert ophthalmologist (gold standard) according to the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale as represented with DR levels 0-4 (97, 100, 100, 103, 100, respectively). Weighted kappa was calculated to measure the DR classification agreement for (1) a certified human grader without, and (2) with assistance from a DL algorithm and (3) the DL operating autonomously. Using any DR (level 0 vs. 1-4) as a cutoff, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). Finally, we assessed lesion discrepancies between Model 3 and the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As compared to the gold standard, weighted kappa for Models 1-3 was 0.88, 0.89 and 0.72, sensitivities were 95%, 94% and 78% and specificities were 82%, 84% and 81%. Extrapolating to a real-world DR prevalence of 23.8%, the PPV were 63%, 64% and 57% and the NPV were 98%, 98% and 92%. Discrepancies between the gold standard and Model 3 were mainly incorrect detection of artefacts (n = 49), missed microaneurysms (n = 26) and inconsistencies between the segmentation and classification (n = 51).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the autonomous DL algorithm for DR classification only performed on par with a human grader for some measures in a high-risk population, extrapolations to a real-world population demonstrated an excellent 92% NPV, which could make it clinically feasible to use autonomously to identify non-DR patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":6915,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ophthalmologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grading of diabetic retinopathy using a pre-segmenting deep learning classification model: Validation of an automated algorithm.\",\"authors\":\"Dyllan Edson Similié, Jakob K H Andersen, Sebastian Dinesen, Thiusius R Savarimuthu, Jakob Grauslund\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aos.16781\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To validate the performance of autonomous diabetic retinopathy (DR) grading by comparing a human grader and a self-developed deep-learning (DL) algorithm with gold-standard evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 500, 6-field retinal images graded by an expert ophthalmologist (gold standard) according to the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale as represented with DR levels 0-4 (97, 100, 100, 103, 100, respectively). Weighted kappa was calculated to measure the DR classification agreement for (1) a certified human grader without, and (2) with assistance from a DL algorithm and (3) the DL operating autonomously. Using any DR (level 0 vs. 1-4) as a cutoff, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). Finally, we assessed lesion discrepancies between Model 3 and the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As compared to the gold standard, weighted kappa for Models 1-3 was 0.88, 0.89 and 0.72, sensitivities were 95%, 94% and 78% and specificities were 82%, 84% and 81%. Extrapolating to a real-world DR prevalence of 23.8%, the PPV were 63%, 64% and 57% and the NPV were 98%, 98% and 92%. Discrepancies between the gold standard and Model 3 were mainly incorrect detection of artefacts (n = 49), missed microaneurysms (n = 26) and inconsistencies between the segmentation and classification (n = 51).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the autonomous DL algorithm for DR classification only performed on par with a human grader for some measures in a high-risk population, extrapolations to a real-world population demonstrated an excellent 92% NPV, which could make it clinically feasible to use autonomously to identify non-DR patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.16781\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ophthalmologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.16781","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:通过比较人类分级者和自主开发的深度学习(DL)算法与黄金标准评估,验证自主糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)分级的性能:我们纳入了由眼科专家(金标准)根据国际临床糖尿病视网膜病变疾病严重程度量表进行分级的 500 张 6 视野视网膜图像,DR 级别为 0-4(分别为 97、100、100、103、100)。计算加权卡帕值的目的是衡量 (1) 在无 DL 算法辅助的情况下,(2) 在有 DL 算法辅助的情况下,(3) 在 DL 自主运行的情况下,DR 分级的一致性。以任何 DR(0 级与 1-4 级)为分界线,我们计算了灵敏度、特异性以及阳性和阴性预测值(PPV 和 NPV)。最后,我们评估了模型 3 与金标准之间的病变差异:与金标准相比,模型 1-3 的加权卡帕值分别为 0.88、0.89 和 0.72,灵敏度分别为 95%、94% 和 78%,特异度分别为 82%、84% 和 81%。推断真实世界的 DR 患病率为 23.8%,PPV 为 63%、64% 和 57%,NPV 为 98%、98% 和 92%。金标准和模型 3 之间的差异主要是伪影检测不正确(49 例)、微动脉瘤漏检(26 例)以及分割和分类不一致(51 例):尽管在高风险人群中,用于 DR 分类的自主 DL 算法在某些指标上的表现仅与人类分级师相当,但推断真实世界人群的 NPV 为 92%,在临床上可用于自主识别非 DR 患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Grading of diabetic retinopathy using a pre-segmenting deep learning classification model: Validation of an automated algorithm.

Purpose: To validate the performance of autonomous diabetic retinopathy (DR) grading by comparing a human grader and a self-developed deep-learning (DL) algorithm with gold-standard evaluation.

Methods: We included 500, 6-field retinal images graded by an expert ophthalmologist (gold standard) according to the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale as represented with DR levels 0-4 (97, 100, 100, 103, 100, respectively). Weighted kappa was calculated to measure the DR classification agreement for (1) a certified human grader without, and (2) with assistance from a DL algorithm and (3) the DL operating autonomously. Using any DR (level 0 vs. 1-4) as a cutoff, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). Finally, we assessed lesion discrepancies between Model 3 and the gold standard.

Results: As compared to the gold standard, weighted kappa for Models 1-3 was 0.88, 0.89 and 0.72, sensitivities were 95%, 94% and 78% and specificities were 82%, 84% and 81%. Extrapolating to a real-world DR prevalence of 23.8%, the PPV were 63%, 64% and 57% and the NPV were 98%, 98% and 92%. Discrepancies between the gold standard and Model 3 were mainly incorrect detection of artefacts (n = 49), missed microaneurysms (n = 26) and inconsistencies between the segmentation and classification (n = 51).

Conclusion: While the autonomous DL algorithm for DR classification only performed on par with a human grader for some measures in a high-risk population, extrapolations to a real-world population demonstrated an excellent 92% NPV, which could make it clinically feasible to use autonomously to identify non-DR patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Ophthalmologica
Acta Ophthalmologica 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
433
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Acta Ophthalmologica is published on behalf of the Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation and is the official scientific publication of the following societies: The Danish Ophthalmological Society, The Finnish Ophthalmological Society, The Icelandic Ophthalmological Society, The Norwegian Ophthalmological Society and The Swedish Ophthalmological Society, and also the European Association for Vision and Eye Research (EVER). Acta Ophthalmologica publishes clinical and experimental original articles, reviews, editorials, educational photo essays (Diagnosis and Therapy in Ophthalmology), case reports and case series, letters to the editor and doctoral theses.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of intravitreal faricimab therapy for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The ever ongoing cosmetic quest to change eye colour. Slowing myopia progression with cylindrical annular refractive elements (CARE) spectacle lenses-Year 1 results from a 2-year prospective, multi-centre trial. Correlation of retinal fluid and photoreceptor and RPE loss in neovascular AMD by automated quantification, a real-world FRB! analysis. Incidence, risk factors, and patient characteristics in severe contact lens-related microbial keratitis.
×
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