MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401233044 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000002229

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Optic Neuritis Subtypes From Ocular Fundus Photographs

2024· article· en· W4401233044 on OpenAlex
Étienne Bénard-Séguin, Christopher Nielsen, Abdullah Sarhan, Abdullah Al-Ani, Antoine Sylvestre-Bouchard, Derek Waldner, Lindsey B. De Lott, Suresh Subramaniam, Fiona Costello

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOptic neuritisMyelin oligodendrocyte glycoproteinFundus (uterus)Multiple sclerosisNeuromyelitis opticaSerologyEtiologyRetrospective cohort studyDiseaseOphthalmologyPathologyImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Optic neuritis (ON) is a complex clinical syndrome that has diverse etiologies and treatments based on its subtypes. Notably, ON associated with multiple sclerosis (MS ON) has a good prognosis for recovery irrespective of treatment, whereas ON associated with other conditions including neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease is often associated with less favorable outcomes. Delay in treatment of these non-MS ON subtypes can lead to irreversible vision loss. It is important to distinguish MS ON from other ON subtypes early, to guide appropriate management. Yet, identifying ON and differentiating subtypes can be challenging as MRI and serological antibody test results are not always readily available in the acute setting. The purpose of this study is to develop a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to predict subtype based on fundus photographs, to aid the diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected ON. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients with ON seen at our institution between 2007 and 2022. Fundus photographs (1,599) were retrospectively collected from a total of 321 patients classified into 2 groups: MS ON (262 patients; 1,114 photographs) and non-MS ON (59 patients; 485 photographs). The dataset was divided into training and holdout test sets with an 80%/20% ratio, using stratified sampling to ensure equal representation of MS ON and non-MS ON patients in both sets. Model hyperparameters were tuned using 5-fold cross-validation on the training dataset. The overall performance and generalizability of the model was subsequently evaluated on the holdout test set. RESULTS: The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the developed model, evaluated on the holdout test dataset, yielded an area under the ROC curve of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.92). The model attained an accuracy of 76.2% (95% CI, 68.4-83.1), a sensitivity of 74.2% (95% CI, 55.9-87.4) and a specificity of 76.9% (95% CI, 67.6-85.0) in classifying images as non-MS-related ON. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence supporting a role for AI in differentiating non-MS ON subtypes from MS ON. Future work will aim to increase the size of the dataset and explore the role of combining clinical and paraclinical measures to refine deep learning models over time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.288 · 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