Cauchy Pradhan1, Max Wuehr2, Farhoud Akrami2, Maximilian Neuhaeusser2, Sabrina Huth2, Thomas Brandt3, Klaus Jahn4, Roman Schniepp5. 1. German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, DSGZ, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany. Electronic address: cauchypradhan@gmail.com. 2. German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, DSGZ, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany. 3. German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, DSGZ, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, DSGZ, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; Department of Neurology, Schön Klinik Bad Aibling, 83043 Bad Aibling, Germany. 5. German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, DSGZ, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; Department of Neurology, University of Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Automated pattern recognition systems have been used for accurate identification of neurological conditions as well as the evaluation of the treatment outcomes. This study aims to determine the accuracy of diagnoses of (oto-)neurological gait disorders using different types of automated pattern recognition techniques. METHODS:Clinically confirmed cases of phobic postural vertigo (N = 30), cerebellar ataxia (N = 30), progressive supranuclear palsy (N = 30), bilateral vestibulopathy (N = 30), as well as healthy subjects (N = 30) were recruited for the study. 8 measurements with 136 variables using a GAITRite(®) sensor carpet were obtained from each subject. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups (training cases and validation cases). Sensitivity and specificity of k-nearest neighbor (KNN), naive-bayes classifier (NB), artificial neural network (ANN), and support vector machine (SVM) in classifying the validation cases were calculated. RESULTS: ANN and SVM had the highest overall sensitivity with 90.6% and 92.0% respectively, followed by NB (76.0%) and KNN (73.3%). SVM and ANN showed high false negative rates for bilateral vestibulopathy cases (20.0% and 26.0%); while KNN and NB had high false negative rates for progressive supranuclear palsy cases (76.7% and 40.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Automated pattern recognition systems are able to identify pathological gait patterns and establish clinical diagnosis with good accuracy. SVM and ANN in particular differentiate gait patterns of several distinct oto-neurological disorders of gait with high sensitivity and specificity compared to KNN and NB. Both SVM and ANN appear to be a reliable diagnostic and management tool for disorders of gait.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Automated pattern recognition systems have been used for accurate identification of neurological conditions as well as the evaluation of the treatment outcomes. This study aims to determine the accuracy of diagnoses of (oto-)neurological gait disorders using different types of automated pattern recognition techniques. METHODS: Clinically confirmed cases of phobic postural vertigo (N = 30), cerebellar ataxia (N = 30), progressive supranuclear palsy (N = 30), bilateral vestibulopathy (N = 30), as well as healthy subjects (N = 30) were recruited for the study. 8 measurements with 136 variables using a GAITRite(®) sensor carpet were obtained from each subject. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups (training cases and validation cases). Sensitivity and specificity of k-nearest neighbor (KNN), naive-bayes classifier (NB), artificial neural network (ANN), and support vector machine (SVM) in classifying the validation cases were calculated. RESULTS: ANN and SVM had the highest overall sensitivity with 90.6% and 92.0% respectively, followed by NB (76.0%) and KNN (73.3%). SVM and ANN showed high false negative rates for bilateral vestibulopathy cases (20.0% and 26.0%); while KNN and NB had high false negative rates for progressive supranuclear palsy cases (76.7% and 40.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Automated pattern recognition systems are able to identify pathological gait patterns and establish clinical diagnosis with good accuracy. SVM and ANN in particular differentiate gait patterns of several distinct oto-neurological disorders of gait with high sensitivity and specificity compared to KNN and NB. Both SVM and ANN appear to be a reliable diagnostic and management tool for disorders of gait.
Authors: Rob Ramakers; Saskia Koene; Jan T Groothuis; Paul de Laat; Mirian Ch Janssen; Jan Smeitink Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis Date: 2017-05-15 Impact factor: 4.123
Authors: Linard Filli; Tabea Sutter; Christopher S Easthope; Tim Killeen; Christian Meyer; Katja Reuter; Lilla Lörincz; Marc Bolliger; Michael Weller; Armin Curt; Dominik Straumann; Michael Linnebank; Björn Zörner Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Hanna Marie Röhling; Patrik Althoff; Radina Arsenova; Daniel Drebinger; Norman Gigengack; Anna Chorschew; Daniel Kroneberg; Maria Rönnefarth; Tobias Ellermeyer; Sina Cathérine Rosenkranz; Christoph Heesen; Behnoush Behnia; Shigeki Hirano; Satoshi Kuwabara; Friedemann Paul; Alexander Ulrich Brandt; Tanja Schmitz-Hübsch Journal: JMIR Hum Factors Date: 2022-04-01
Authors: Christopher Fricke; Jalal Alizadeh; Nahrin Zakhary; Timo B Woost; Martin Bogdan; Joseph Classen Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 4.003