MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120044285 · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2020.12.034

Quantification of Key Retinal Features in Early and Late Age-Related Macular Degeneration Using Deep Learning

2021· article· en· W3120044285 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals CanadaHeidelberg EngineeringRadboud UniversiteitAllerganDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftBayerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNovartisWellcome TrustRoche
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceReceiver operating characteristicSegmentationIntraclass correlationSørensen–Dice coefficientDeep learningMacular degenerationFalse positive paradoxComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)MedicineImage segmentationMachine learningOphthalmologyStatisticsReproducibilityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PurposeWe sought to develop and validate a deep learning model for segmentation of 13 features associated with neovascular and atrophic age-related macular degeneration (AMD).DesignDevelopment and validation of a deep-learning model for feature segmentation.MethodsData for model development were obtained from 307 optical coherence tomography volumes. Eight experienced graders manually delineated all abnormalities in 2712 B-scans. A deep neural network was trained with these data to perform voxel-level segmentation of the 13 most common abnormalities (features). For evaluation, 112 B-scans from 112 patients with a diagnosis of neovascular AMD were annotated by 4 independent observers. The main outcome measures were Dice score, intraclass correlation coefficient, and free-response receiver operating characteristic curve.ResultsOn 11 of 13 features, the model obtained a mean Dice score of 0.63 ± 0.15, compared with 0.61 ± 0.17 for the observers. The mean intraclass correlation coefficient for the model was 0.66 ± 0.22, compared with 0.62 ± 0.21 for the observers. Two features were not evaluated quantitatively because of a lack of data. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that the model scored similar or higher sensitivity per false positives compared with the observers.ConclusionsThe quality of the automatic segmentation matches that of experienced graders for most features, exceeding human performance for some features. The quantified parameters provided by the model can be used in the current clinical routine and open possibilities for further research into treatment response outside clinical trials. We sought to develop and validate a deep learning model for segmentation of 13 features associated with neovascular and atrophic age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Development and validation of a deep-learning model for feature segmentation. Data for model development were obtained from 307 optical coherence tomography volumes. Eight experienced graders manually delineated all abnormalities in 2712 B-scans. A deep neural network was trained with these data to perform voxel-level segmentation of the 13 most common abnormalities (features). For evaluation, 112 B-scans from 112 patients with a diagnosis of neovascular AMD were annotated by 4 independent observers. The main outcome measures were Dice score, intraclass correlation coefficient, and free-response receiver operating characteristic curve. On 11 of 13 features, the model obtained a mean Dice score of 0.63 ± 0.15, compared with 0.61 ± 0.17 for the observers. The mean intraclass correlation coefficient for the model was 0.66 ± 0.22, compared with 0.62 ± 0.21 for the observers. Two features were not evaluated quantitatively because of a lack of data. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that the model scored similar or higher sensitivity per false positives compared with the observers. The quality of the automatic segmentation matches that of experienced graders for most features, exceeding human performance for some features. The quantified parameters provided by the model can be used in the current clinical routine and open possibilities for further research into treatment response outside clinical trials.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it