| Literature DB >> 29317897 |
Jiho Nam1, Jun-Su Jang2, Honggie Kim3, Jong Yeol Kim2, Jun-Hyeong Do2.
Abstract
In 2012, the Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine proposed an objective and comprehensive physical diagnostic model to address quantification problems in the existing Sasang constitutional diagnostic method. However, certain issues have been raised regarding a revision of the proposed diagnostic model. In this paper, we propose various methodological approaches to address the problems of the previous diagnostic model. Firstly, more useful variables are selected in each component. Secondly, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator is used to reduce multicollinearity without the modification of explanatory variables. Thirdly, proportions of SC types and age are considered to construct individual diagnostic models and classify the training set and the test set for reflecting the characteristics of the entire dataset. Finally, an integrated model is constructed with explanatory variables of individual diagnosis models. The proposed integrated diagnostic model significantly improves the sensitivities for both the male SY type (36.4% → 62.0%) and the female SE type (43.7% → 64.5%), which were areas of limitation of the previous integrated diagnostic model. The ideas of these new algorithms are expected to contribute not only to the scientific development of Sasang constitutional medicine in Korea but also to that of other diagnostic methods for traditional medicine.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29317897 PMCID: PMC5727843 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9180159
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
The number of excluded and included data cases for each individual diagnostic model.
| Reason for exclusion | Face | Body shape | Voice | Questionnaire |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not collected initially | 182 | 0 | 592 | 624 |
| TY constitution | 76 | 76 | 73 | 73 |
| Below 15 years of age | 96 | 107 | 79 | 79 |
| Data extraction errors and missing cases | 1,343 | 429 | 388 | 150 |
| Final number of subjects | 2,152 | 3,237 | 2,717 | 2,923 |
| Common samples after integrating the four components | 1,891 (male: 657; female: 1,234) | |||
Distribution of subjects by age group.
| Age group | Face | Body shape | Voice | Questionnaire | Common samples | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | SE | SY | ||||||||||||
| M | F | M | F | M | F | M | F | M | F | M | F | M | F | |
| 10s | 32 | 29 | 50 | 41 | 45 | 40 | 46 | 41 | 10 | 14 | 13 | 6 | 6 | 8 |
| 20s | 89 | 162 | 120 | 234 | 97 | 198 | 98 | 214 | 23 | 45 | 27 | 50 | 25 | 48 |
| 30s | 131 | 273 | 186 | 375 | 159 | 326 | 165 | 346 | 46 | 66 | 35 | 81 | 32 | 93 |
| 40s | 161 | 317 | 245 | 453 | 202 | 381 | 214 | 416 | 58 | 109 | 42 | 73 | 41 | 95 |
| 50s | 169 | 317 | 264 | 464 | 219 | 375 | 240 | 412 | 61 | 99 | 34 | 72 | 49 | 105 |
| 60s~ | 171 | 301 | 299 | 506 | 244 | 431 | 267 | 464 | 66 | 128 | 22 | 68 | 67 | 74 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Total | 2,152 | 3,237 | 2,717 | 2,923 | 1,891 | |||||||||
M: male; F: female.
Figure 1Feature points extracted automatically from facial images. Added feature point.
Candidate facial feature variables.
| Size-related variables | Shape-related variables | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Face shape | (i) Width | FD_43_143, FD_53_153, FD_94_194, FDH_33_133 | (i) Angle | FA_53_94, FAs_153_194, FA_94_43, FAs_194_143, FA_53_94_43, FA_18_25_43, FA_118_125_143, |
| (ii) Depth | PDH_44_53, PDH_12_36, PDH_14_36, PDH_21_36 | FA_18_17_43, FA_118_117_143, FA_17_25_43, FA_117_125_143, FA_18_25_94, FA_18_43_50, | ||
| FA_18_94_50 | ||||
| (iii) Height | FDV_47_52, FDV_47_50, FDV_10_21, FDV_52_50, FDV_81_50, | (ii) Ratio | FHD_33_133_43_143, FDD_53_153_43_143, FDD_94_194_43_143, FHD_33_133_53_153, | |
| PDV_6_12, PDV_6_32, PDV_10_32, PDV_12_32, PDV_21_32, PDV_25_32 | FVV_47_52_52_81, FVV_47_52_52_50, FVV_47_52_81_50, FVV_52_81_81_50, PVV_6_10_10_33, | |||
| (iv) Area | FArea02, FArea03, FArea02/FArea03 | PVV_12_14_14_32, PVV_12_21_14_32, FVD_52_50_53_153, FVD_52_81_53_153, FVD_81_50_94_194 | ||
|
| ||||
| Forehead | Height: | FDV_47_10, PDV_6_9, PDV_6_10 | (i) Angle | PAi_7_6, PAi_9_7, PAi_71_72, PAi_72_73, PA_6_7_9 |
| (ii) Ratio | PDD_77_9_6_9 | |||
| (iii) Depth | PDH_6_7, PDH_9_12 | |||
| (iv) Distance | PD_7_77, PDV_6_7, PDV_7_9, PDV_9_12, PA_9_12, PA_10_12 | |||
|
| ||||
| Eye | (i) Width | FDH_18_25, FDH_118_125, FDH_18_118, FDH_25_125, FDH_21_121 | (i) Angle | FA_18_17_25, FA_118_117_125, FAi_25_17, FAis_125_117, FAis_18_17, FAi_118_117, |
| FAis_18_25, FAi_118_125 | ||||
| (ii) Height | FD_17_26, FD_117_126 | (ii) Ratio | FDH_17_26_18_25, FDH_117_126_118_125, FDH_52_50_18_118, FDD_17_26_52_81, FDD_17_26_52_50, | |
| (iii) Distance | FD_17_25, FD_117_125, FD_18_25, FD_118_125 | (FDH_18_25+FDH_118_125)/2/FDH_18_118, (FDH_18_25+FDH_118_125)/2/FD_53_153, | ||
| (FDH_18_25+FDH_118_125)/2/FDH_33_133, FHD_18_118_53_153, FHD_25_125_53_153 | ||||
|
| ||||
| Nose | (i) Width | FDH_36_136, PDH_12_14, PDL_14_12_21 | (i) Angle | PAi_14_12, PA_14_21, PA_12_14_21, PAi_13_84, PA_87_88, PA_87_21 |
| (ii) Height | FDV_52_81, PDV_12_14, PDV_14_21, PDV_12_21, PD_12_21 | |||
| (iii) Depth | PDH_41_21 | (ii) Ratio | FHD_36_136_53_153, FVH_52_81_36_136 | |
| (iv) Area | FArea_52_36_136, PArea_12_14_21 | |||
|
| ||||
| Mouth | (i) Width | PDL_22_21_32, PDL_25_21_32 | Ratio | FVV_80_50_52_50, FVV_80_50_81_50 |
| (ii) Height | FDV_80_50 | |||
|
| ||||
| Chin | (i) Depth | PDH_32_36 | Angle | PA_32_33, PA_33_36, PA_32_33_36 |
| (ii) Height | PDV_32_36 | |||
| (iii) Distance | PD_32_36 | |||
Note. FD(n1, n2) [or PD(n1, n2)]: distance between points n1 and n2 in a frontal (or profile) image;
FDH(n1, n2) [or PDH(n1, n2)]: horizontal distance between n1 and n2 in a frontal (or profile) image;
FDV(n1, n2) [or PDV(n1, n2)]: vertical distance between n1 and n2 in a frontal (or profile) image;
FA(n1, n2) [or PA(n1, n2)]: angle between the line through two points n1 and n2 and a horizontal line in a frontal (or profile) image;
FA(n1, n2, n3) [or PA(n1, n2, n3)]: angle between three points, n1, n2, and n3, in a frontal (or profile) image;
PAR(n1, n2, n3): area of the triangle formed by three points, n1, n2, and n3, in a profile image;
FHD_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PHD_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FDH_n1_n2/FD_n3_n4 [or PDH_n1_n2/PD_n3_n4];
FDH_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PDH_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FD_n1_n2/FDH_n3_n4 [or PD_n1_n2/PDH_n3_n4];
FDD_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PDD_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FD_n1_n2/FD_n3_n4 [or PD_n1_n2/PD_n3_n4];
FVD_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PVD_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FDV_n1_n2/FD_n3_n4 [or PDV_n1_n2/PD_n3_n4];
FVV_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PVV_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FDV_n1_n2/FDV_n3_n4 [or PDV_n1_n2/PDV_n3_n4];
FVH_n1_n2_n3_n4 [or PVH_n1_n2_n3_n4] = FDV_n1_n2/FDH_n3_n4 [or PDV_n1_n2/PDH_n3_n4].
Description of sentence features.
| Sentence feature | Description |
|---|---|
| sF0, sFCV | Average pitch frequency and coefficient of variation of the pitch |
| sF10, sF50, sF90 | 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of pitch distribution |
| sFHL | Ratio of (sF90-sF50) to (sF50-sF10) |
| sDT | Duration time of a sentence reading |
| sHNR | HNR |
| sCPP | CPP |
| sMFCC1~12 | 12 Mel-frequency cepstral coefficients |
All feature values are based on the averaged output of the two sentence utterances, which were repeated recordings of the same sentence.
Diagnostic results of the proposed integrated diagnostic model.
| Male | Female | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | |||||||
| TE | SE | SY | Total | TE | SE | SY | Total | |||
| Training set | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 144 | 14 | 30 | 188 | 76.6% | 223 | 32 | 66 | 321 | 69.5% |
| SE | 14 | 81 | 26 | 121 | 66.9% | 33 | 146 | 63 | 242 | 60.3% |
| SY | 29 | 28 | 92 | 149 | 61.7% | 65 | 65 | 168 | 298 | 56.4% |
| Total | 187 | 123 | 148 | 458 | 321 | 243 | 297 | 861 | ||
| Accuracy | 69.2% | 62.4% | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Test set | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 64 | 4 | 8 | 76 | 84.2% | 104 | 12 | 25 | 141 | 73.8% |
| SE | 8 | 35 | 9 | 52 | 67.3% | 12 | 69 | 26 | 107 | 64.5% |
| SY | 22 | 5 | 44 | 71 | 62.0% | 25 | 28 | 72 | 125 | 57.6% |
| Total | 94 | 44 | 61 | 199 | 141 | 109 | 123 | 373 | ||
| Accuracy | 71.9% | 65.7% | ||||||||
Diagnosis results of proposed integrated diagnosis model using a cutoff.
| Male | Female | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | |||||||
| TE | SE | SY | Total | TE | SE | SY | Total | |||
| Training set | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 131 | 9 | 19 | 159 | 82.4% | 181 | 15 | 39 | 235 | 77.0% |
| SE | 10 | 71 | 17 | 98 | 72.4% | 19 | 110 | 28 | 157 | 70.1% |
| SY | 19 | 15 | 68 | 102 | 66.7% | 39 | 40 | 114 | 193 | 59.1% |
| Total | 160 | 95 | 104 | 359 | 239 | 165 | 181 | 585 | ||
| Accuracy | 75.2% | 69.2% | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Test set | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 58 | 3 | 3 | 64 | 90.6% | 89 | 11 | 14 | 114 | 78.1% |
| SE | 4 | 29 | 5 | 38 | 76.3% | 8 | 58 | 9 | 75 | 77.3% |
| SY | 15 | 4 | 38 | 57 | 66.7% | 12 | 14 | 49 | 75 | 65.3% |
| Total | 77 | 36 | 46 | 159 | 109 | 83 | 72 | 264 | ||
| Accuracy | 78.6% | 74.2% | ||||||||
Comparison of diagnosis results of the set of common data between the test set of the proposed integrated diagnosis model and the full set of the previous integrated diagnosis model.
| Male | Female | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | Predicted SC type | Sensitivity | |||||||
| TE | SE | SY | Total | TE | SE | SY | Total | |||
| Proposed integrated diagnosis model | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 36 | 2 | 5 | 43 | 83.7% | 68 | 9 | 16 | 93 | 73.1% |
| SE | 3 | 21 | 8 | 32 | 65.6% | 7 | 46 | 15 | 68 | 67.6% |
| SY | 14 | 4 | 24 | 42 | 57.1% | 13 | 21 | 47 | 81 | 58.0% |
| Total | 53 | 27 | 37 | 117 | 88 | 76 | 78 | 242 | ||
| Accuracy | 69.2% | 66.5% | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Previous integrated diagnosis model | ||||||||||
| True SC type | ||||||||||
| TE | 38 | 3 | 2 | 43 | 88.4% | 62 | 6 | 25 | 93 | 66.7% |
| SE | 9 | 15 | 8 | 32 | 46.9% | 10 | 27 | 31 | 68 | 39.7% |
| SY | 15 | 7 | 20 | 42 | 47.6% | 18 | 10 | 53 | 81 | 65.4% |
| Total | 62 | 25 | 30 | 117 | 90 | 43 | 109 | 242 | ||
| Accuracy | 62.4% | 58.7% | ||||||||