PURPOSE: To determine classification criteria for tubercular uveitis. DESIGN: Machine learning of cases with tubercular uveitis and 14 other uveitides. METHODS: Cases of noninfectious posterior uveitis or panuveitis, and of infectious posterior uveitis or panuveitis, were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on the diagnosis, using formal consensus techniques. Cases were analyzed by anatomic class, and each class was split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used on the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the intermediate uveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated on the validation sets. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-seven cases of tubercular uveitis were evaluated by machine learning against other uveitides. Key criteria for tubercular uveitis were a compatible uveitic syndrome, including (1) anterior uveitis with iris nodules, (2) serpiginous-like tubercular choroiditis, (3) choroidal nodule (tuberculoma), (4) occlusive retinal vasculitis, and (5) in hosts with evidence of active systemic tuberculosis, multifocal choroiditis; and evidence of tuberculosis, including histologically or microbiologically confirmed infection, positive interferon-γ release assay test, or positive tuberculin skin test. The overall accuracy of the diagnosis of tubercular uveitis vs other uveitides in the validation set was 98.2% (95% confidence interval 96.5, 99.1). The misclassification rates for tubercular uveitis were training set, 3.4%; and validation set, 3.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for tubercular uveitis had a low misclassification rate and seemed to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.
PURPOSE: To determine classification criteria for tubercular uveitis. DESIGN: Machine learning of cases with tubercular uveitis and 14 other uveitides. METHODS: Cases of noninfectious posterior uveitis or panuveitis, and of infectious posterior uveitis or panuveitis, were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on the diagnosis, using formal consensus techniques. Cases were analyzed by anatomic class, and each class was split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used on the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the intermediate uveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated on the validation sets. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-seven cases of tubercular uveitis were evaluated by machine learning against other uveitides. Key criteria for tubercular uveitis were a compatible uveitic syndrome, including (1) anterior uveitis with iris nodules, (2) serpiginous-like tubercular choroiditis, (3) choroidal nodule (tuberculoma), (4) occlusive retinal vasculitis, and (5) in hosts with evidence of active systemic tuberculosis, multifocal choroiditis; and evidence of tuberculosis, including histologically or microbiologically confirmed infection, positive interferon-γ release assay test, or positive tuberculin skin test. The overall accuracy of the diagnosis of tubercular uveitis vs other uveitides in the validation set was 98.2% (95% confidence interval 96.5, 99.1). The misclassification rates for tubercular uveitis were training set, 3.4%; and validation set, 3.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for tubercular uveitis had a low misclassification rate and seemed to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.
Authors: Douglas A Jabs; Andrew Dick; John T Doucette; Amod Gupta; Susan Lightman; Peter McCluskey; Annabelle A Okada; Alan G Palestine; James T Rosenbaum; Sophia M Saleem; Jennifer Thorne; Brett Trusko Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Rohit Aggarwal; Sarah Ringold; Dinesh Khanna; Tuhina Neogi; Sindhu R Johnson; Amy Miller; Hermine I Brunner; Rikke Ogawa; David Felson; Alexis Ogdie; Daniel Aletaha; Brian M Feldman Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Rina La Distia Nora; Mirjam E J van Velthoven; Ninette H Ten Dam-van Loon; Tom Misotten; Marleen Bakker; Martin P van Hagen; Aniki Rothova Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-11-18 Impact factor: 5.258