ABSTRACT.Purpose: To compare the performance of two machine learning classifiers (MLCs), artificial neural networks (ANNs) and support vector machines (SVMs), with input based on retinal nerve fibre layer thickness (RNFLT) measurements by optical coherence tomography (OCT), on the diagnosis of glaucoma, and to assess the effects of different input parameters. Methods: We analysed Stratus OCT data from 90 healthy persons and 62 glaucoma patients. Performance of MLCs was compared using conventional OCT RNFLT parameters plus novel parameters such as minimum RNFLT values, 10th and 90th percentiles of measured RNFLT, and transformations of A-scan measurements. For each input parameter and MLC, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AROC) was calculated. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between ANNs and SVMs. The best AROCs for both ANN (0.982, 95%CI: 0.966-0.999) and SVM (0.989, 95% CI: 0.979-1.0) were based on input of transformed A-scan measurements. Our SVM trained on this input performed better than ANNs or SVMs trained on any of the single RNFLT parameters (p £ 0.038). The performance of ANNs and SVMs trained on minimum thickness values and the 10th and 90th percentiles were at least as good as ANNs and SVMs with input based on the conventional RNFLT parameters. Conclusion: No differences between ANN and SVM were observed in this study. Both MLCs performed very well, with similar diagnostic performance. Input parameters have a larger impact on diagnostic performance than the type of machine classifier. Our results suggest that parameters based on transformed A-scan thickness measurements of the RNFL processed by machine classifiers can improve OCT-based glaucoma diagnosis.
The high diagnostic performance of our ANN based on refined input visual field data was confirmed in this independent sample. Its diagnostic accuracy was slightly to considerably better than that of the compared algorithms. The results indicate the large potential for ANN as an important clinical glaucoma diagnostic tool.
BackgroundThe performance of glaucoma diagnostic systems could be conceivably improved by the integration of functional and structural test measurements that provide relevant and complementary information for reaching a diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the performance of data fusion methods and techniques for simple combination of Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP) and Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) data for the diagnosis of glaucoma using Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs).MethodsHumphrey 24-2 SITA standard SAP and StratusOCT tests were prospectively collected from a randomly selected population of 125 healthy persons and 135 patients with glaucomatous optic nerve heads and used as input for the ANNs. We tested commercially available standard parameters as well as novel ones (fused OCT and SAP data) that exploit the spatial relationship between visual field areas and sectors of the OCT peripapillary scan circle. We evaluated the performance of these SAP and OCT derived parameters both separately and in combination.ResultsThe diagnostic accuracy from a combination of fused SAP and OCT data (95.39%) was higher than that of the best conventional parameters of either instrument, i.e. SAP Glaucoma Hemifield Test (p < 0.001) and OCT Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness ≥ 1 quadrant (p = 0.031). Fused OCT and combined fused OCT and SAP data provided similar Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AROC) values of 0.978 that were significantly larger (p = 0.047) compared to ANNs using SAP parameters alone (AROC = 0.945). On the other hand, ANNs based on the OCT parameters (AROC = 0.970) did not perform significantly worse than the ANNs based on the fused or combined forms of input data. The use of fused input increased the number of tests that were correctly classified by both SAP and OCT based ANNs.ConclusionsCompared to the use of SAP parameters, input from the combination of fused OCT and SAP parameters, and from fused OCT data, significantly increased the performance of ANNs. Integrating parameters by including a priori relevant information through data fusion may improve ANN classification accuracy compared to currently available methods.
. Purpose: To compare clinicians and a trained artificial neural network (ANN) regarding accuracy and certainty of assessment of visual fields for the diagnosis of glaucoma. Methods: Thirty physicians with different levels of knowledge and experience in glaucoma management assessed 30‐2 SITA Standard visual field printouts that included full Statpac information from 99 patients with glaucomatous optic neuropathy and 66 healthy subjects. Glaucomatous eyes with perimetric mean deviation values worsethan −10 dB were not eligible. The fields were graded on a scale of 1–10, where 1 indicated healthy with absolute certaintyand 10 signified glaucoma; 5.5 was the cut‐off between healthy and glaucoma. The same fields were classified by a previously trained ANN. The ANN output was transformed into a linear scale that matched the scale used in the subjective assessments. Classification certainty was assessed using a classification error score. Results: Among the physicians, sensitivity ranged from 61% to 96% (mean 83%) and specificity from 59% to 100% (mean 90%). Our ANN achieved 93% sensitivity and 91% specificity, and it was significantly more sensitive than the physicians (p < 0.001) at a similar level of specificity. The ANN classification error score was equivalent to the top third scores of all physicians, and the ANN never indicated a high degree of certainty for any of its misclassified visual field tests. Conclusion: Our results indicate that a trained ANN performs at least as well as physicians in assessments of visual fields for the diagnosis of glaucoma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.