MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403405342 · doi:10.3389/fcell.2024.1484329

Development of a transformer-based deep learning algorithm for diabetic peripheral neuropathy classification using corneal confocal microscopy images

2024· article· en· W4403405342 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Danling Liao, Yuyang Deng, Jianzhang Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfocal microscopyPeripheral neuropathyPeripheralMedicineOphthalmologyMicroscopyArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmComputer sciencePathologyBiomedical engineeringDiabetes mellitusOpticsInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is common and can go unnoticed until it is firmly developed. This study aims to establish a transformer-based deep learning algorithm (DLA) to classify corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) images, identifying DPN in diabetic patients. Methods: Our classification model differs from traditional convolutional neural networks (CNNs) using a Swin transformer network with a hierarchical architecture backbone. Participants included those with (DPN+, n = 57) or without (DPN-, n = 37) DPN as determined by the updated Toronto consensus criteria. The CCM image dataset (consisting of 570 DPN+ and 370 DPN- images, with five images selected from each participant's left and right eyes) was randomly divided into training, validation, and test subsets at a 7:1:2 ratio, considering individual participants. The effectiveness of the algorithm was assessed using diagnostic accuracy measures, such as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, in conjunction with Grad-CAM visualization techniques to interpret the model's decisions. Results: In the DPN + group (n = 12), the transformer model successfully predicted all participants, while in the DPN- group (n = 7), one participant was misclassified as DPN+, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9405 (95% CI 0.8166, 1.0000). Among the DPN + images (n = 120), 117 were correctly classified, and among the DPN- images (n = 70), 49 were correctly classified, with an AUC of 0.8996 (95% CI 0.8502, 0.9491). For single-image predictions, the transformer model achieved a superior AUC relative to the ResNet50 model (0.8761, 95% CI 0.8155, 0.9366), the Inception_v3 model (0.8802, 95% CI 0.8231, 0.9374), and the DenseNet121 model (0.8965, 95% CI 0.8438, 0.9491). Conclusion: Transformer-based networks outperform CNN-based networks in rapid binary DPN classification. Transformer-based DLAs have clinical DPN screening potential.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental BiologySame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207