International journal of medical informatics · 2011
Artificial intelligence techniques applied to the development of a decision-support system for diagnosing celiac disease.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное 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.
Tenório Josceli Maria, Hummel Anderson Diniz, Cohrs Frederico Molina, Sdepanian Vera Lucia, Pisa Ivan Torres, de Fátima Marin Heimar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Celiac disease (CD) is a difficult-to-diagnose condition because of its multiple clinical presentations and symptoms shared with other diseases. Gold-standard diagnostic confirmation of suspected CD is achieved by biopsying the small intestine.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) integrated with an automated classifier to recognize CD cases, by selecting from experimental models developed using intelligence artificial techniques.
METHODS: A web-based system was designed for constructing a retrospective database that included 178 clinical cases for training. Tests were run on 270 automated classifiers available in Weka 3.6.1 using five artificial intelligence techniques, namely decision trees, Bayesian inference, k-nearest neighbor algorithm, support vector machines and artificial neural networks. The parameters evaluated were accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve (AUC). AUC was used as a criterion for selecting the CDSS algorithm. A testing database was constructed including 38 clinical CD cases for CDSS evaluation. The diagnoses suggested by CDSS were compared with those made by physicians during patient consultations.
RESULTS: The most accurate method during the training phase was the averaged one-dependence estimator (AODE) algorithm (a Bayesian classifier), which showed accuracy 80.0%, sensitivity 0.78, specificity 0.80 and AUC 0.84. This classifier was integrated into the web-based decision-support system. The gold-standard validation of CDSS achieved accuracy of 84.2% and k=0.68 (p<0.0001) with good agreement. The same accuracy was achieved in the comparison between the physician's diagnostic impression and the gold standard k=0. 64 (p<0.0001). There was moderate agreement between the physician's diagnostic impression and CDSS k=0.46 (p=0.0008).
CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest that CDSS could be used to help in diagnosing CD, since the algorithm tested achieved excellent accuracy in differentiating possible positive from negative CD diagnoses. This study may contribute towards developing of a computer-assisted environment to support CD diagnosis.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) integrated with an automated classifier to recognize CD cases, by selecting from experimental models developed using intelligence artificial techniques.
METHODS: A web-based system was designed for constructing a retrospective database that included 178 clinical cases for training. Tests were run on 270 automated classifiers available in Weka 3.6.1 using five artificial intelligence techniques, namely decision trees, Bayesian inference, k-nearest neighbor algorithm, support vector machines and artificial neural networks. The parameters evaluated were accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve (AUC). AUC was used as a criterion for selecting the CDSS algorithm. A testing database was constructed including 38 clinical CD cases for CDSS evaluation. The diagnoses suggested by CDSS were compared with those made by physicians during patient consultations.
RESULTS: The most accurate method during the training phase was the averaged one-dependence estimator (AODE) algorithm (a Bayesian classifier), which showed accuracy 80.0%, sensitivity 0.78, specificity 0.80 and AUC 0.84. This classifier was integrated into the web-based decision-support system. The gold-standard validation of CDSS achieved accuracy of 84.2% and k=0.68 (p<0.0001) with good agreement. The same accuracy was achieved in the comparison between the physician's diagnostic impression and the gold standard k=0. 64 (p<0.0001). There was moderate agreement between the physician's diagnostic impression and CDSS k=0.46 (p=0.0008).
CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest that CDSS could be used to help in diagnosing CD, since the algorithm tested achieved excellent accuracy in differentiating possible positive from negative CD diagnoses. This study may contribute towards developing of a computer-assisted environment to support CD diagnosis.