A deep learning approach for the screening of referable age-related macular degeneration - Model development and external validation.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Tsui-Kang Hsu, Ivan Pochou Lai, Meng-Ju Tsai, Pei-Jung Lee, Kuo-Chi Hung, Shihyi Yang, Li-Wei Chan, I-Chan Lin, Wei-Hao Chang, Yi-Jin Huang, Meng-Che Cheng, Yi-Ting Hsieh
{"title":"A deep learning approach for the screening of referable age-related macular degeneration - Model development and external validation.","authors":"Tsui-Kang Hsu, Ivan Pochou Lai, Meng-Ju Tsai, Pei-Jung Lee, Kuo-Chi Hung, Shihyi Yang, Li-Wei Chan, I-Chan Lin, Wei-Hao Chang, Yi-Jin Huang, Meng-Che Cheng, Yi-Ting Hsieh","doi":"10.1016/j.jfma.2024.12.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop a deep learning image assessment software, VeriSee™ AMD, and to validate its accuracy in diagnosing referable age-related macular degeneration (AMD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For model development, a total of 6801 judgable 45-degree color fundus images from patients, aged 50 years and over, were collected. These images were assessed for AMD severity by ophthalmologists, according to the Age-Related Eye Disease Studies (AREDS) AMD category. Referable AMD was defined as category three (intermediate) or four (advanced). Of these images, 6123 were used for model training and validation. The other 678 images were used for testing the accuracy of VeriSee™ AMD relative to the ophthalmologists. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for VeriSee™ AMD, and the sensitivities and specificities for VeriSee™ AMD and ophthalmologists were calculated. For external validation, another 937 color fundus images were used to test the accuracy of VeriSee™ AMD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During model development, the AUC for VeriSee™ AMD in diagnosing referable AMD was 0.961. The accuracy for VeriSee™ AMD for testing was 92.04% (sensitivity 90.0% and specificity 92.43%). The mean accuracy of the ophthalmologists in diagnosing referable AMD was 85.8% (range: 75.93%-97.31%). During external validation, VeriSee AMD achieved a sensitivity of 90.03%, a specificity of 96.44%, and an accuracy of 92.04%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VeriSee™ AMD demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing referable AMD from color fundus images. The findings of this study support the use of VeriSee™ AMD in assisting with the clinical screening of intermediate and advanced AMD using color fundus photography.</p>","PeriodicalId":17305,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2024.12.008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To develop a deep learning image assessment software, VeriSee™ AMD, and to validate its accuracy in diagnosing referable age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

Methods: For model development, a total of 6801 judgable 45-degree color fundus images from patients, aged 50 years and over, were collected. These images were assessed for AMD severity by ophthalmologists, according to the Age-Related Eye Disease Studies (AREDS) AMD category. Referable AMD was defined as category three (intermediate) or four (advanced). Of these images, 6123 were used for model training and validation. The other 678 images were used for testing the accuracy of VeriSee™ AMD relative to the ophthalmologists. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for VeriSee™ AMD, and the sensitivities and specificities for VeriSee™ AMD and ophthalmologists were calculated. For external validation, another 937 color fundus images were used to test the accuracy of VeriSee™ AMD.

Results: During model development, the AUC for VeriSee™ AMD in diagnosing referable AMD was 0.961. The accuracy for VeriSee™ AMD for testing was 92.04% (sensitivity 90.0% and specificity 92.43%). The mean accuracy of the ophthalmologists in diagnosing referable AMD was 85.8% (range: 75.93%-97.31%). During external validation, VeriSee AMD achieved a sensitivity of 90.03%, a specificity of 96.44%, and an accuracy of 92.04%.

Conclusions: VeriSee™ AMD demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing referable AMD from color fundus images. The findings of this study support the use of VeriSee™ AMD in assisting with the clinical screening of intermediate and advanced AMD using color fundus photography.

用于筛查可转诊年龄相关性黄斑变性的深度学习方法--模型开发和外部验证。
目的:开发一款深度学习图像评估软件 VeriSee™ AMD,并验证其诊断可转诊年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)的准确性:为开发模型,共收集了 6801 张可判断的 45 度彩色眼底图像,这些图像来自 50 岁及以上的患者。眼科医生根据年龄相关眼病研究(AREDS)的 AMD 类别对这些图像的 AMD 严重程度进行了评估。可转诊的 AMD 被定义为第三类(中级)或第四类(高级)。这些图像中有 6123 张用于模型训练和验证。其他 678 张图像用于测试 VeriSee™ AMD 相对于眼科医生的准确性。计算了 VeriSee™ AMD 的接收器工作特征曲线下面积 (AUC),以及 VeriSee™ AMD 和眼科医生的敏感性和特异性。为了进行外部验证,还使用了另外 937 张彩色眼底图像来测试 VeriSee™ AMD 的准确性:结果:在模型开发过程中,VeriSee™ AMD 诊断可转诊 AMD 的 AUC 为 0.961。VeriSee™ AMD 的检测准确率为 92.04%(灵敏度 90.0%,特异性 92.43%)。眼科医生诊断可转诊 AMD 的平均准确率为 85.8%(范围:75.93%-97.31%)。在外部验证中,VeriSee AMD 的灵敏度为 90.03%,特异度为 96.44%,准确度为 92.04%:VeriSee™ AMD 在通过彩色眼底图像诊断可转诊的 AMD 方面表现出良好的灵敏度和特异性。本研究的结果支持使用 VeriSee™ AMD 协助使用彩色眼底摄影对中晚期 AMD 进行临床筛查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
381
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Journal of the Formosan Medical Association (JFMA), published continuously since 1902, is an open access international general medical journal of the Formosan Medical Association based in Taipei, Taiwan. It is indexed in Current Contents/ Clinical Medicine, Medline, ciSearch, CAB Abstracts, Embase, SIIC Data Bases, Research Alert, BIOSIS, Biological Abstracts, Scopus and ScienceDirect. As a general medical journal, research related to clinical practice and research in all fields of medicine and related disciplines are considered for publication. Article types considered include perspectives, reviews, original papers, case reports, brief communications, correspondence and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信