从自动手术中温度数据集中去除伪影的两种新算法的演示和性能评估。(预印本)

Amit Bardia, R. Deshpande, G. Michel, D. Yanez, F. Dai, N. Pace, K. Schuster, M. Mathis, S. Kheterpal, R. Schonberger
{"title":"从自动手术中温度数据集中去除伪影的两种新算法的演示和性能评估。(预印本)","authors":"Amit Bardia, R. Deshpande, G. Michel, D. Yanez, F. Dai, N. Pace, K. Schuster, M. Mathis, S. Kheterpal, R. Schonberger","doi":"10.2196/preprints.37174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n BACKGROUND\n Automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data by temperature probes leads to the possibility of incurring a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact their utility for observational research.\n \n \n OBJECTIVE\n We sought to compare the performance of two de-novo algorithms to filter such artifacts.\n \n \n METHODS\n In this observational retrospective study intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for non-cardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) registry. Two algorithms were developed and were then compared to the reference standard of anesthesiologists’ manual artifact detection. Sensitivity and specificity for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and Area Under the Curve (AUC) for hypothermia (below 36C) for each patient after artifact removal by each methodology.\n \n \n RESULTS\n A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both the algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (Specificity- Algorithm 1: 99.02 % vs. Algorithm 2: 99.54%; Sensitivity- Algorithm 1: 49.13% vs. Algorithm 2: 37.72%, F-score- Algorithm 1: 0.65 vs. Algorithm 2: 0.55). The timeX temperature hypothermic Area Under 36.0 degrees and the mean temperature per case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists.\n \n \n CONCLUSIONS\n The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts which closely approximate manual sorting by anesthesiologists.Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of a highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithm that can be readily employed by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.\n","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms to Remove Artifacts from Automated Intraoperative Temperature Datasets. (Preprint)\",\"authors\":\"Amit Bardia, R. Deshpande, G. Michel, D. Yanez, F. Dai, N. Pace, K. Schuster, M. Mathis, S. Kheterpal, R. Schonberger\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/preprints.37174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n BACKGROUND\\n Automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data by temperature probes leads to the possibility of incurring a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact their utility for observational research.\\n \\n \\n OBJECTIVE\\n We sought to compare the performance of two de-novo algorithms to filter such artifacts.\\n \\n \\n METHODS\\n In this observational retrospective study intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for non-cardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) registry. Two algorithms were developed and were then compared to the reference standard of anesthesiologists’ manual artifact detection. Sensitivity and specificity for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and Area Under the Curve (AUC) for hypothermia (below 36C) for each patient after artifact removal by each methodology.\\n \\n \\n RESULTS\\n A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both the algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (Specificity- Algorithm 1: 99.02 % vs. Algorithm 2: 99.54%; Sensitivity- Algorithm 1: 49.13% vs. Algorithm 2: 37.72%, F-score- Algorithm 1: 0.65 vs. Algorithm 2: 0.55). The timeX temperature hypothermic Area Under 36.0 degrees and the mean temperature per case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists.\\n \\n \\n CONCLUSIONS\\n The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts which closely approximate manual sorting by anesthesiologists.Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of a highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithm that can be readily employed by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":73557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.37174\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR perioperative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.37174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景通过温度探针自动采集术中患者温度数据可能会导致与探针定位相关的许多伪影,这些伪影可能会影响其在观察性研究中的实用性。目的我们试图比较两种从头算法过滤此类伪影的性能。方法在这项观察性回顾性研究中,从多中心围手术期结果组(MPOG)登记中提取接受非心脏手术全身麻醉的成年人的术中温度数据。开发了两种算法,并将其与麻醉师手动伪影检测的参考标准进行了比较。计算每种算法的伪影检测灵敏度和特异性,以及体温过低(低于36)的平均温度和曲线下面积(AUC)C) 通过每种方法去除伪影之后的每一个患者。结果分析了200份麻醉记录中27683个温度读数。麻醉师之间的总体一致性为92.1%。两种算法都具有较高的特异性,但敏感性中等(特异性-算法1:99.02%对算法2:99.54%;敏感性-算法1:49.13%对算法2:37.72%,F-评分-算法1:0.65对。算法2:0.55)。算法和麻醉师之间的timeX温度低于36.0度的区域和去除伪影后每个病例的平均温度相似。结论经过测试的算法提供了一种自动过滤术中温度伪影的方法,与麻醉师的手动分类非常接近。我们的研究提供了证据,证明了一种高度可推广的伪影减少算法的有效性,该算法可以很容易地用于依赖于自动术中数据采集的观察性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms to Remove Artifacts from Automated Intraoperative Temperature Datasets. (Preprint)
BACKGROUND Automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data by temperature probes leads to the possibility of incurring a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact their utility for observational research. OBJECTIVE We sought to compare the performance of two de-novo algorithms to filter such artifacts. METHODS In this observational retrospective study intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for non-cardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) registry. Two algorithms were developed and were then compared to the reference standard of anesthesiologists’ manual artifact detection. Sensitivity and specificity for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and Area Under the Curve (AUC) for hypothermia (below 36C) for each patient after artifact removal by each methodology. RESULTS A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both the algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (Specificity- Algorithm 1: 99.02 % vs. Algorithm 2: 99.54%; Sensitivity- Algorithm 1: 49.13% vs. Algorithm 2: 37.72%, F-score- Algorithm 1: 0.65 vs. Algorithm 2: 0.55). The timeX temperature hypothermic Area Under 36.0 degrees and the mean temperature per case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists. CONCLUSIONS The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts which closely approximate manual sorting by anesthesiologists.Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of a highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithm that can be readily employed by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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