| Literature DB >> 34095816 |
Samruddhi S Kulkarni1, Nasim Katebi2, Camilo E Valderrama2, Peter Rohloff3,4, Gari D Clifford2,5.
Abstract
Routine blood pressure (BP) measurement in pregnancy is commonly performed using automated oscillometric devices. Since no wireless oscillometric BP device has been validated in preeclamptic populations, a simple approach for capturing readings from such devices is needed, especially in low-resource settings where transmission of BP data from the field to central locations is an important mechanism for triage. To this end, a total of 8192 BP readings were captured from the Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) screen of a standard Omron M7 self-inflating BP cuff using a cellphone camera. A cohort of 49 lay midwives captured these data from 1697 pregnant women carrying singletons between 6 weeks and 40 weeks gestational age in rural Guatemala during routine screening. Images exhibited a wide variability in their appearance due to variations in orientation and parallax; environmental factors such as lighting, shadows; and image acquisition factors such as motion blur and problems with focus. Images were independently labeled for readability and quality by three annotators (BP range: 34-203 mm Hg) and disagreements were resolved. Methods to preprocess and automatically segment the LCD images into diastolic BP, systolic BP and heart rate using a contour-based technique were developed. A deep convolutional neural network was then trained to convert the LCD images into numerical values using a multi-digit recognition approach. On readable low- and high-quality images, this proposed approach achieved a 91% classification accuracy and mean absolute error of 3.19 mm Hg for systolic BP and 91% accuracy and mean absolute error of 0.94 mm Hg for diastolic BP. These error values are within the FDA guidelines for BP monitoring when poor quality images are excluded. The performance of the proposed approach was shown to be greatly superior to state-of-the-art open-source tools (Tesseract and the Google Vision API). The algorithm was developed such that it could be deployed on a phone and work without connectivity to a network.Entities:
Keywords: blood pressure; convolutional neural network; digital transcription; hypertension; optical character recognition; preeclampsia
Year: 2021 PMID: 34095816 PMCID: PMC8177819 DOI: 10.3389/frai.2021.543176
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Artif Intell ISSN: 2624-8212
Figure 1An Android-based app to capture blood pressure readings used in this study: (A) The app being used by traditional birth attendants in Highland Guatemala is shown (NBC Universal News Group, 2017). (B) The app interface as seen by the user is shown, with a “mask” to help align the liquid crystal display (LCD) and improve quality during capture.
Figure 2Steps of image transcription using cellphone camera.
Figure 3Design of proposed optical character recognition (OCR) approach to digitize blood pressure readings.
Figure 4Examples of each class from blood pressure images dataset: (A) Blur. (B) Dark. (C) Contains reflections. (D) Far. (E) Cropped. (F) Good quality.
Figure 5Enhancing the liquid crystal display (LCD) frame boundaries. (A) A sample input RGB image is shown, while in (B) the binary thresholded image obtained after performing image enhancement on the input is shown (see section 3.2.1).
Figure 7Liquid crystal display (LCD) frame normalization. (A) The binary thresholded blood pressure (BP) LCD frame extracted with contour border is shown, and (B) the LCD frame after border removal is shown. (C) 2 single monitor LCD frames as a final result of the LCD normalization module are shown (see section 3.2.3).
Optical character recognition (OCR) performance.
| 1 | Tesseract | Held-out good-quality images (SBP) | 20.2 | 185.2 |
| Held-out good-quality images (DBP) | 14.3 | 49.3 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (SBP) | 6.7 | 191.8 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (DBP) | 7.9 | 52.8 | ||
| 2 | Google Vision API | Held-out good-quality images (SBP) | 42.1 | 64.03 |
| Held-out good-quality images (DBP) | 43.2 | 36.46 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (SBP) | 26.5 | 88.57 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (DBP) | 23.0 | 56.47 | ||
| 3 | CNN model, good-quality images | Held-out good-quality images (SBP) | 88.1 | |
| Held-out good-quality images (DBP) | 86.1 | 1.73 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (SBP) | 61.7 | 7.55 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (DBP) | 62.8 | 5.03 | ||
| 4 | CNN model, good- and poor-quality images | Held-out good-quality images (SBP) | 3.19 | |
| Held-out good quality images (DBP) | ||||
| Held-out poor-quality images (SBP) | 65.1 | 8.00 | ||
| Held-out poor-quality images (DBP) | 66.2 | 3.69 |
For each experiment, the classification accuracy and the mean absolute error (MAE) is provided for the image sets. DBP indicates diastolic blood pressure and SBP indicates systolic blood pressure. Best performance statistics are in bold.
Figure 8Three typical examples of optical character recognition (OCR) results using (A) Tesseract and (B) Google vision API on original (raw) good-quality images. Notice the significant errors produced by Tesseract with overwhelming false positive and negative detections, resulting in no useful information. The Google API produced acceptable results on only one of the photographs.