从自动术中体温数据集中去除伪影的两种新算法的演示和性能评估:多中心、观察性、回顾性研究。

Amit Bardia, Ranjit Deshpande, George Michel, David Yanez, Feng Dai, Nathan L Pace, Kevin Schuster, Michael R Mathis, Sachin Kheterpal, Robert B Schonberger
{"title":"从自动术中体温数据集中去除伪影的两种新算法的演示和性能评估:多中心、观察性、回顾性研究。","authors":"Amit Bardia, Ranjit Deshpande, George Michel, David Yanez, Feng Dai, Nathan L Pace, Kevin Schuster, Michael R Mathis, Sachin Kheterpal, Robert B Schonberger","doi":"10.2196/37174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data via temperature probes leads to the possibility of producing a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact these probes' utility for observational research.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to compare the performance of two de novo algorithms for filtering such artifacts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this observational retrospective study, the intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group registry. Two algorithms were developed and then compared to the reference standard-anesthesiologists' manual artifact detection process. Algorithm 1 (a slope-based algorithm) was based on the linear curve fit of 3 adjacent temperature data points. Algorithm 2 (an interval-based algorithm) assessed for time gaps between contiguous temperature recordings. Sensitivity and specificity values for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and areas under the curve for hypothermia (temperatures below 36 C) for each patient, after artifact removal via each methodology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (specificity: 99.02% for algorithm 1 vs 99.54% for algorithm 2; sensitivity: 49.13% for algorithm 1 vs 37.72% for algorithm 2; F-score: 0.65 for algorithm 1 vs 0.55 for algorithm 2). The areas under the curve for time × hypothermic temperature and the mean temperatures recorded for each case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts that closely approximates manual sorting by anesthesiologists. Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithms that can be readily used by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.</p>","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"e37174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9591708/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.\",\"authors\":\"Amit Bardia, Ranjit Deshpande, George Michel, David Yanez, Feng Dai, Nathan L Pace, Kevin Schuster, Michael R Mathis, Sachin Kheterpal, Robert B Schonberger\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/37174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data via temperature probes leads to the possibility of producing a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact these probes' utility for observational research.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to compare the performance of two de novo algorithms for filtering such artifacts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this observational retrospective study, the intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group registry. Two algorithms were developed and then compared to the reference standard-anesthesiologists' manual artifact detection process. Algorithm 1 (a slope-based algorithm) was based on the linear curve fit of 3 adjacent temperature data points. Algorithm 2 (an interval-based algorithm) assessed for time gaps between contiguous temperature recordings. Sensitivity and specificity values for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and areas under the curve for hypothermia (temperatures below 36 C) for each patient, after artifact removal via each methodology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (specificity: 99.02% for algorithm 1 vs 99.54% for algorithm 2; sensitivity: 49.13% for algorithm 1 vs 37.72% for algorithm 2; F-score: 0.65 for algorithm 1 vs 0.55 for algorithm 2). The areas under the curve for time × hypothermic temperature and the mean temperatures recorded for each case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts that closely approximates manual sorting by anesthesiologists. Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithms that can be readily used by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"e37174\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9591708/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/37174\",\"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/10.2196/37174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:通过体温探针自动获取术中患者体温数据可能会产生一些与探针定位相关的伪影,这可能会影响这些探针在观察研究中的应用:我们试图比较两种过滤伪影的全新算法的性能:在这项观察性回顾研究中,我们从多中心围手术期结果小组登记处提取了接受全身麻醉的非心脏手术成人的术中体温数据。研究人员开发了两种算法,并将其与参考标准--麻醉医师的人工假象检测过程进行了比较。算法 1(基于斜率的算法)基于 3 个相邻温度数据点的线性曲线拟合。算法 2(基于时间间隔的算法)对连续体温记录之间的时间间隔进行评估。计算了每种算法检测伪影的灵敏度和特异性值,以及通过每种方法去除伪影后每名患者的平均温度和低体温(温度低于 36 C )曲线下的面积:共分析了 200 份麻醉记录中的 27,683 个体温读数。麻醉师之间的总体一致率为 92.1%。两种算法的特异性都很高,但灵敏度一般(特异性:算法 1 为 99.02%,算法 2 为 99.54%;灵敏度:算法 1 为 49.13%,算法 2 为 37.72%;F 评分:算法 1 为 0.65,算法 2 为 0.55)。时间×低体温的曲线下面积和去除伪影后每个病例记录的平均温度在算法和麻醉师之间相似:测试的算法提供了一种自动过滤术中体温伪影的方法,与麻醉医师的人工分类非常接近。我们的研究提供了证据,证明了具有高度通用性的减少伪影算法的有效性,这些算法可随时用于依赖自动术中数据采集的观察研究。
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 for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.

Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.

Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.

Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.

Background: The automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data via temperature probes leads to the possibility of producing a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact these probes' utility for observational research.

Objective: We sought to compare the performance of two de novo algorithms for filtering such artifacts.

Methods: In this observational retrospective study, the intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group registry. Two algorithms were developed and then compared to the reference standard-anesthesiologists' manual artifact detection process. Algorithm 1 (a slope-based algorithm) was based on the linear curve fit of 3 adjacent temperature data points. Algorithm 2 (an interval-based algorithm) assessed for time gaps between contiguous temperature recordings. Sensitivity and specificity values for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and areas under the curve for hypothermia (temperatures below 36 C) for each patient, after artifact removal via 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 algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (specificity: 99.02% for algorithm 1 vs 99.54% for algorithm 2; sensitivity: 49.13% for algorithm 1 vs 37.72% for algorithm 2; F-score: 0.65 for algorithm 1 vs 0.55 for algorithm 2). The areas under the curve for time × hypothermic temperature and the mean temperatures recorded for each 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 that closely approximates manual sorting by anesthesiologists. Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithms that can be readily used 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