| Literature DB >> 25953124 |
Saman Sargolzaei, Mercedes Cabrerizo, Arman Sargolzaei, Shirin Noei, Anas Eddin, Hoda Rajaei, Alberto Pinzon-Ardila, Sergio M Gonzalez-Arias, Prasanna Jayakar, Malek Adjouadi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The lives of half a million children in the United States are severely affected due to the alterations in their functional and mental abilities which epilepsy causes. This study aims to introduce a novel decision support system for the diagnosis of pediatric epilepsy based on scalp EEG data in a clinical environment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25953124 PMCID: PMC4423569 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-16-S7-S9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.169
Figure 1Flowchart of the proposed decision support system. Flowchart of the proposed decision support system for computer aided diagnosis of pediatric epilepsy based on machine learning techniques applied on constructed FCNs of the brain. Algorithm starts with segmentation of multichannel EEG recordings by applying a moving window (w) with overlap. Functional connectivity networks are constructed and mapped into a corresponding graph for each window. Extraction of graph theoretical based features (u) is then followed by a decision making process which uses a probabilistic approach to determine whether a patient is epileptic or not.
Demographic characteristics of study subjects
| Age | Female/Male | Number of Segments | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12.86 ± 3.39* | 3/4 | 13 ± 6.98 | |||
| 9.09 ± 4.81 | 5/6 | 32.18 ± 22.41 | |||
| ns | ns | < 0.05 | |||
| 12 | M | - | 200 | 11 | |
| 15 | F | - | 512 | 20 | |
| 12 | M | - | 200 | 14 | |
| 15 | F | - | 512 | 18 | |
| 10 | M | - | 512 | 3 | |
| 18 | F | - | 512 | 20 | |
| 8 | M | - | 512 | 5 | |
| 10 | F | Left temporal dysplasia | 200 | 14 | |
| 7 | F | Left frontal region | 512 | 67 | |
| 4 | F | Right fronto-centro-temporal | 512 | 39 | |
| 14 | M | Generalized | 512 | 18 | |
| 8 | M | Right parietal | 200 | 30 | |
| 7 | M | Left frontal pole, posterior frontal lobe | 512 | 77 | |
| 15 | F | Left and right frontal | 500 | 40 | |
| 4 | M | Right fronto-centro-temporal | 512 | 25 | |
| 2 | F | Left temporal (posterior) | 512 | 25 | |
| 14 | M | Generalized | 512 | 6 | |
| 15 | M | Generalized | 512 | 13 | |
*Data Presented as mean ± S.D. where applicable
**Student t test (with statistical significance threshold of 0.05) was used to test for age and number of segments.
Fisher's exact test was used to test for gender.
PC = Pediatric Control; PE = Pediatric Epilepsy;
M: Male; F: Female.
ns: not significant.
Graph theoretical features of functional connectivity networks
| Feature | Feature description | Feature calculation |
|---|---|---|
| ldg | Link density of the graph | (2 × |
| acc | Average of closeness centrality | (1/ |
| gcc | Graph clustering coefficient | (3 × |
| rcc | Rich club coefficient | ( |
| smg | S-metric of graph | |
| acg | Algebraic connectivity of graph | |
| eng | Energy of network graph | |
ne: Number of graph edges; nn: number of graph nodes;
nn_k: Number of nodes with degree larger thank; ne_k: number of edges among nodes with degree larger than k.
Figure 2Flowchart of the two phase decision making process. Flowchart of the two-phase decision making process. Phase I assigns labels to multichannel scalp EEG segments based on the Gaussian Mixture Modelling of graph theoretical based features; Phase II assigns labels (epileptic or non-epileptic) to the subjects by assigning a probability in the likelihood of belonging in one of the two groups.
Figure 3Visualization of constructed functional connectivity networks. Visualization of constructed undirected functional connectivity networks (FCNs) and the corresponding plot of the connectivity distances for the average map across (a), (b) pediatric control group (c), (d) pediatric epilepsy. Index of electrodes pair represent the pair of electrodes, e.g. index 0 corresponds to the connectivity distance (angle) among pair c3-c4 and the index 1 corresponds to the connectivity distance (angle) among pair c3-o1 and etc. (e) shows the results of student t test for the null hypothesis that assumes no statistically significant differences for the index pair of electrodes across the pediatric epilepsy and pediatric control groups. Rejection of the null hypothesis is highlighted with the black boxes when p < 0.00001, bonferroni adjusted for multiple comparison.
Figure 4Graph representations. Graph representations of average of constructed FCNs over the (a) pediatric control (PC) group and (b) pediatric epilepsy (PE) group. Thickness of links (graph edges) shows the strength of connectivity among electrode pairs.
Statistical analysis of features across PC and PE
| Feature | PC | PE | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| 44.56 ± 7.77** | 57.74 ± 8.44 | < 0.000 | |
| 0.0014 ± 0.0003 | 0.0010 ± 0.0003 | < 0.000 | |
| 1.18 ± 0..006 | 1.18 ± 0.005 | ||
| 44.56 ± 7.77 | 57.74 ± 8.44 | < 0.000 | |
| 2.38 ± 0.81 | 3.98 ± 1.04 | < 0.000 | |
| 659.76 ± 135.45 | 913.24 ± 169.46 | < 0.000 | |
| 1.68 ± 0.26 | 2.11 ± 0.28 | < 0.000 | |
*Two-way Student t test is used for test the difference between PC and PE groups. Statistical significant level of 0.01 is considered for p-value.
**mean ± standard deviation.
Connectivity strength for left hemisphere, right hemisphere and inter-hemispheres
| Hemisphere Connection | Hemisphere Connection | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10.82 ± 2.6 | 9.09 ± 4.23 | 18 ± 11.4 | 10.64 ± 4.41 | 3.42 ± 2.79 | 10 ± 7.1 | ||
| 19.3 ± 4.12 | 19.55 ± 4.16 | 34.1 ± 12.45 | 9 ± 3.39 | 7.75 ± 2.3 | 9.75 ± 5.98 | ||
| 20 ± 1.62 | 15.71 ± 1.14 | 33.42 ± 5.62 | 11.87 ± 4.93 | 16.28 ± 6.1 | 26.13 ± 15.4 | ||
| 16 ± 5.72 | 15.5 ± 4.74 | 27 ± 18.82 | 15.28 ± 4.84 | 13.11 ± 7.5 | 22.16 ± 17.5 | ||
| 24.67 ± 1.5 | 15 ± 1.73 | 33.33 ± 16 | 9.6 ± 6.5 | 11.5 ± 5.3 | 14 ± 16.2 | ||
| 18.7 ± 2.56 | 15.2 ± 3.67 | 35.75 ± 7.57 | 9.7 ± 1.38 | 8.5 ± 1.7 | 19.25 ± 4.78 | ||
| 13.8 ± 3.96 | 12.8 ± 3.96 | 27 ± 11.62 | 9.85 ± 1.72 | 11.97 ± 4.4 | 17.15 ± 9.1 | ||
| 6.28 ± 2.82 | 7.7 ± 5.73 | 9.16 ± 11.43 | |||||
| 14.36 ± 3.36 | 5.1 ± 1.1 | 4.64 ± 1.87 | |||||
| 5.6 ± 3 | 7 ± 4.7 | 11.17 ± 7.3 | |||||
| 14.15 ± 1.72 | 15.38 ± 5 | 34 ± 7.85 | |||||
Clustering results with no prior knowledge provided on diagnosis
| Condition | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clustered as Epilepsy | 0 | 9 | Positive predictive value (%) |
| Clustered as Healthy | 7 | 2 | Negative predictive value (%) |
| Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) | |
| 0 | 11 | 0 | |
| 0 | 20 | 0 | |
| 0 | 14 | 0 | |
| 2 | 18 | 11 | |
| 0 | 3 | 0 | |
| 0 | 20 | 0 | |
| 1 | 5 | 20 | |
| 12 | 14 | 86 | |
| 67 | 67 | 100 | |
| 10 | 39 | 25 | |
| 12 | 18 | 66 | |
| 21 | 30 | 70 | |
| 66 | 77 | 86 | |
| 30 | 40 | 75 | |
| 23 | 25 | 92 | |
| 25 | 25 | 100 | |
| 5 | 6 | 83 | |
| 3 | 13 | 23 | |