Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eye Vis (Lond) ; 11(1): 11, 2024 Mar 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38494521

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: To describe the diagnostic performance of a deep learning (DL) algorithm in detecting Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) based on specular microscopy (SM) and to reliably detect widefield peripheral SM images with an endothelial cell density (ECD) > 1000 cells/mm2. METHODS: Five hundred and forty-seven subjects had SM imaging performed for the central cornea endothelium. One hundred and seventy-three images had FECD, while 602 images had other diagnoses. Using fivefold cross-validation on the dataset containing 775 central SM images combined with ECD, coefficient of variation (CV) and hexagonal endothelial cell ratio (HEX), the first DL model was trained to discriminate FECD from other images and was further tested on an external set of 180 images. In eyes with FECD, a separate DL model was trained with 753 central/paracentral SM images to detect SM with ECD > 1000 cells/mm2 and tested on 557 peripheral SM images. Area under curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity were evaluated. RESULTS: The first model achieved an AUC of 0.96 with 0.91 sensitivity and 0.91 specificity in detecting FECD from other images. With an external validation set, the model achieved an AUC of 0.77, with a sensitivity of 0.69 and specificity of 0.68 in differentiating FECD from other diagnoses. The second model achieved an AUC of 0.88 with 0.79 sensitivity and 0.78 specificity in detecting peripheral SM images with ECD > 1000 cells/mm2. CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study developed a DL model that could reliably detect FECD from other SM images and identify widefield SM images with ECD > 1000 cells/mm2 in eyes with FECD. This could be the foundation for future DL models to track progression of eyes with FECD and identify candidates suitable for therapies such as Descemet stripping only.

2.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 875242, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36314006

RESUMO

Background: Many artificial intelligence (AI) studies have focused on development of AI models, novel techniques, and reporting guidelines. However, little is understood about clinicians' perspectives of AI applications in medical fields including ophthalmology, particularly in light of recent regulatory guidelines. The aim for this study was to evaluate the perspectives of ophthalmologists regarding AI in 4 major eye conditions: diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and cataract. Methods: This was a multi-national survey of ophthalmologists between March 1st, 2020 to February 29th, 2021 disseminated via the major global ophthalmology societies. The survey was designed based on microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem questions, and the software as a medical device (SaMD) regulatory framework chaired by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Factors associated with AI adoption for ophthalmology analyzed with multivariable logistic regression random forest machine learning. Results: One thousand one hundred seventy-six ophthalmologists from 70 countries participated with a response rate ranging from 78.8 to 85.8% per question. Ophthalmologists were more willing to use AI as clinical assistive tools (88.1%, n = 890/1,010) especially those with over 20 years' experience (OR 3.70, 95% CI: 1.10-12.5, p = 0.035), as compared to clinical decision support tools (78.8%, n = 796/1,010) or diagnostic tools (64.5%, n = 651). A majority of Ophthalmologists felt that AI is most relevant to DR (78.2%), followed by glaucoma (70.7%), AMD (66.8%), and cataract (51.4%) detection. Many participants were confident their roles will not be replaced (68.2%, n = 632/927), and felt COVID-19 catalyzed willingness to adopt AI (80.9%, n = 750/927). Common barriers to implementation include medical liability from errors (72.5%, n = 672/927) whereas enablers include improving access (94.5%, n = 876/927). Machine learning modeling predicted acceptance from participant demographics with moderate to high accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curves of 0.63-0.83. Conclusion: Ophthalmologists are receptive to adopting AI as assistive tools for DR, glaucoma, and AMD. Furthermore, ML is a useful method that can be applied to evaluate predictive factors on clinical qualitative questionnaires. This study outlines actionable insights for future research and facilitation interventions to drive adoption and operationalization of AI tools for Ophthalmology.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA