Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2024
Smartphone pupillometry with machine learning differentiates ischemic from hemorrhagic stroke: A pilot study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maxin Anthony J, Gulek Bernice G, Lim Do H, Kim Samuel, Shaibani Rami, Winston Graham M, McGrath Lynn B, Mariakakis Alex, Abecassis Isaac J, Levitt Michael R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Similarities between acute ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke make diagnosis and triage challenging. We studied a smartphone-based quantitative pupillometer for differentiation of acute ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stroke patients were recruited prior to surgical or interventional treatment. Smartphone pupillometry was used to quantify components of the pupillary light reflex (PLR). A synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was applied to correct sample size imbalance. Four binary classification model types were trained using all possible combinations of the PLR components with 10-fold cross validation stratified by cohort. Models were evaluated for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), and F1 score. The three best-performing models were selected based on AUC. Shapley additive explanation plots were produced to explain PLR parameter impacts on model predictions.
RESULTS: Eleven subjects with intraparenchymal hemorrhage and 22 subjects with acute ischemic stroke were enrolled. One way ANOVA demonstrated significant differences between healthy control data, AIS, and IPH in five out of seven PLR parameters. After SMOTE, each class had n=22 PLR recordings for model training. The best-performing model was random forest using a combination of latency, mean and maximum constriction velocity, and mean dilation velocity to discriminate between stroke types with 91.5% (95% confidence interval: 84.1-98.9) accuracy, 90% (82.9-97.1) sensitivity, 93.3% (83-100) specificity, 0.917 (0.847-0.987) AUC, and 90.7% (84.1-97.3) F1 score.
CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone-based quantitative pupillometry could be useful in differentiating between acute ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stroke patients were recruited prior to surgical or interventional treatment. Smartphone pupillometry was used to quantify components of the pupillary light reflex (PLR). A synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was applied to correct sample size imbalance. Four binary classification model types were trained using all possible combinations of the PLR components with 10-fold cross validation stratified by cohort. Models were evaluated for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), and F1 score. The three best-performing models were selected based on AUC. Shapley additive explanation plots were produced to explain PLR parameter impacts on model predictions.
RESULTS: Eleven subjects with intraparenchymal hemorrhage and 22 subjects with acute ischemic stroke were enrolled. One way ANOVA demonstrated significant differences between healthy control data, AIS, and IPH in five out of seven PLR parameters. After SMOTE, each class had n=22 PLR recordings for model training. The best-performing model was random forest using a combination of latency, mean and maximum constriction velocity, and mean dilation velocity to discriminate between stroke types with 91.5% (95% confidence interval: 84.1-98.9) accuracy, 90% (82.9-97.1) sensitivity, 93.3% (83-100) specificity, 0.917 (0.847-0.987) AUC, and 90.7% (84.1-97.3) F1 score.
CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone-based quantitative pupillometry could be useful in differentiating between acute ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke.