| Literature DB >> 36177328 |
Hyunmin Ahn1, Ikhyun Jun1,2, Kyoung Yul Seo1, Eung Kweon Kim2,3, Tae-Im Kim1,2.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the value of artificial intelligence (AI) for recommendation of pupil dilation test using medical interview and basic ophthalmologic examinations. Design: Retrospective, cross-sectional study. Subjects: Medical records of 56,811 patients who visited our outpatient clinic for the first time between 2017 and 2020 were included in the training dataset. Patients who visited the clinic in 2021 were included in the test dataset. Among these, 3,885 asymptomatic patients, including eye check-up patients, were initially included in test dataset I. Subsequently, 14,199 symptomatic patients who visited the clinic in 2021 were included in test dataset II.Entities:
Keywords: artificial intelligence; machine learning; medical interview; ophthalmologic examination; pupil dilation test
Year: 2022 PMID: 36177328 PMCID: PMC9513048 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.967710
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Figure 1The flow of medical services from to doctors in this study.
Figure 2The process used in this study and artificial intelligence modeling for recommending pupil dilation test.
Characteristics of study patients in training dataset and test dataset I and II.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years, mean±SD) | 57.5 ± 18.9 | 48.5 ± 22.3 | 60.0 ± 17.8 |
| Sex (proportion of female, %) | 54.1 | 60.2 | 54.2 |
| Uncorrected distance visual acuity (logMAR, mean±SD) | 0.57 ± 0.51 | 0.48 ± 0.52 | 0.57 ± 0.50 |
| Corrected distance visual acuity (logMAR, mean±SD) | 0.19 ± 0.27 | 0.07 ± 0.08 | 0.19 ± 0.29 |
| Intraocular pressure (mmHg, mean±SD) | 15.3 ± 3.5 | 14.7 ± 3.4 | 15.2 ± 3.3 |
| Spherical equivalent (diopters, mean±SD) | −1.65 ± 3.06 | −1.68 ± 2.81 | −1.60 ± 3.45 |
| Corneal power (diopters, mean±SD) | 43.33 ± 2.02 | 42.19 ± 3.75 | 43.30 ± 2.02 |
|
| 65.1 | 26.5 | 59.1 |
| Lens (% of clinically significant lesion) | 28.9 | 35.3 | 23.5 |
| Vitreous (% of clinically significant lesion) | 7.8 | 2.5 | 7.0 |
| Macula (% of clinically significant lesion) | 38.6 | 14.8 | 40.5 |
| Peripheral retina (% of clinically significant lesion) | 12.6 | 30.0 | 15.3 |
| Optic disc (% of clinically significant lesion) | 20.1 | 25.5 | 19.7 |
Measured by auto-keratometry.
Measured by non-contact tonometry.
The performance of AI for recommendation pupil dilation test in test dataset I and II.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | 0.908 | 0.880–0.936 | 0.949 | 0.934–0.964 |
| Sensitivity (Recall) | 0.757 | 0.713–0.801 | 0.942 | 0.928–0.956 |
| Specificity | 0.962 | 0.947–0.977 | 0.960 | 0.927–0.993 |
| Positive predictive value (Precision) | 0.878 | 0.834–0.922 | 0.971 | 0.957–0.985 |
| F1 score | 0.813 | - | 0.956 | - |
Locations of clinically significant lesions in false-negative and false-positive categories with overall test dataset.
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| |
| Lens | 10.3 |
| Vitreous | 5.3 |
| Macula | 37.2 |
| Peripheral retina | 20.1 |
| Optic disc | 28.1 |
|
| |
| Cornea and Anterior chamber | 73.1% |
| Eyelid and Extra-orbital area | 10.7% |
| Non-ophthalmologic | 17.3% |