1
|
ZhuParris A, de Goede AA, Yocarini IE, Kraaij W, Groeneveld GJ, Doll RJ. Machine Learning Techniques for Developing Remotely Monitored Central Nervous System Biomarkers Using Wearable Sensors: A Narrative Literature Review. SENSORS (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2023; 23:s23115243. [PMID: 37299969 DOI: 10.3390/s23115243] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 05/23/2023] [Accepted: 05/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Central nervous system (CNS) disorders benefit from ongoing monitoring to assess disease progression and treatment efficacy. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies offer a means for the remote and continuous symptom monitoring of patients. Machine Learning (ML) techniques can process and engineer mHealth data into a precise and multidimensional biomarker of disease activity. OBJECTIVE This narrative literature review aims to provide an overview of the current landscape of biomarker development using mHealth technologies and ML. Additionally, it proposes recommendations to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and interpretability of these biomarkers. METHODS This review extracted relevant publications from databases such as PubMed, IEEE, and CTTI. The ML methods employed across the selected publications were then extracted, aggregated, and reviewed. RESULTS This review synthesized and presented the diverse approaches of 66 publications that address creating mHealth-based biomarkers using ML. The reviewed publications provide a foundation for effective biomarker development and offer recommendations for creating representative, reproducible, and interpretable biomarkers for future clinical trials. CONCLUSION mHealth-based and ML-derived biomarkers have great potential for the remote monitoring of CNS disorders. However, further research and standardization of study designs are needed to advance this field. With continued innovation, mHealth-based biomarkers hold promise for improving the monitoring of CNS disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahnjili ZhuParris
- Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Zernikedreef 8, 2333 CL Leiden, The Netherlands
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS), Snellius Gebouw, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
- Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Annika A de Goede
- Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Zernikedreef 8, 2333 CL Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Iris E Yocarini
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS), Snellius Gebouw, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Wessel Kraaij
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS), Snellius Gebouw, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
- The Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), Anna van Buerenplein 1, 2595 DA, Den Haag, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Jan Groeneveld
- Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Zernikedreef 8, 2333 CL Leiden, The Netherlands
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS), Snellius Gebouw, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Robert Jan Doll
- Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR), Zernikedreef 8, 2333 CL Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Long E, Chen J, Wu X, Liu Z, Wang L, Jiang J, Li W, Zhu Y, Chen C, Lin Z, Li J, Li X, Chen H, Guo C, Zhao L, Nie D, Liu X, Liu X, Dong Z, Yun B, Wei W, Xu F, Lv J, Li M, Ling S, Zhong L, Chen J, Zheng Q, Zhang L, Xiang Y, Tan G, Huang K, Xiang Y, Lin D, Zhang X, Dongye M, Wang D, Chen W, Liu X, Lin H, Liu Y. Artificial intelligence manages congenital cataract with individualized prediction and telehealth computing. NPJ Digit Med 2020; 3:112. [PMID: 32904507 PMCID: PMC7455726 DOI: 10.1038/s41746-020-00319-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 08/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
A challenge of chronic diseases that remains to be solved is how to liberate patients and medical resources from the burdens of long-term monitoring and periodic visits. Precise management based on artificial intelligence (AI) holds great promise; however, a clinical application that fully integrates prediction and telehealth computing has not been achieved, and further efforts are required to validate its real-world benefits. Taking congenital cataract as a representative, we used Bayesian and deep-learning algorithms to create CC-Guardian, an AI agent that incorporates individualized prediction and scheduling, and intelligent telehealth follow-up computing. Our agent exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in both internal and multi-resource validation. We integrate our agent with a web-based smartphone app and prototype a prediction-telehealth cloud platform to support our intelligent follow-up system. We then conduct a retrospective self-controlled test validating that our system not only accurately detects and addresses complications at earlier stages, but also reduces the socioeconomic burdens compared to conventional methods. This study represents a pioneering step in applying AI to achieve real medical benefits and demonstrates a novel strategy for the effective management of chronic diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erping Long
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jingjing Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiaohang Wu
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Zhenzhen Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Liming Wang
- School of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi’an, China
- School of Software, Xidian University, Xi’an, China
| | - Jiewei Jiang
- School of Electronics Engineering, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an, China
| | - Wangting Li
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yi Zhu
- Department of Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida USA
| | - Chuan Chen
- Department of Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida USA
| | - Zhuoling Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jing Li
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiaoyan Li
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Hui Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Chong Guo
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Lanqin Zhao
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Daoyao Nie
- Shenzhen Eye Hospital, Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shenzhen University School of Medicine, Shenzhen, China
| | - Xinhua Liu
- Shenzhen Eye Hospital, Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shenzhen University School of Medicine, Shenzhen, China
| | - Xin Liu
- Shenzhen Eye Hospital, Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shenzhen University School of Medicine, Shenzhen, China
| | - Zhe Dong
- Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Bo Yun
- Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Wenbin Wei
- Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Fan Xu
- Department of Ophthalmology, People’s Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi China
| | - Jian Lv
- Department of Ophthalmology, People’s Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi China
| | - Min Li
- Department of Ophthalmology, People’s Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi China
| | - Shiqi Ling
- Department of Ophthalmology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Lei Zhong
- Department of Ophthalmology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Junhong Chen
- Puning People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Jieyang, China
| | - Qishan Zheng
- Puning People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Jieyang, China
| | - Li Zhang
- Department of Ophthalmology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Yi Xiang
- Department of Ophthalmology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Gang Tan
- The First Affiliated Hospital of University of South China, Hengyang, China
| | - Kai Huang
- School of Data and Computer Science, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510060 China
| | - Yifan Xiang
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Duoru Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xulin Zhang
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Meimei Dongye
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Dongni Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Weirong Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiyang Liu
- School of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi’an, China
- School of Software, Xidian University, Xi’an, China
| | - Haotian Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yizhi Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Phu J, Khuu SK, Agar A, Kalloniatis M. Clinical Evaluation of Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm-Faster Compared With Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm-Standard in Normal Subjects, Glaucoma Suspects, and Patients With Glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2019; 208:251-264. [PMID: 31470001 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.08.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2019] [Revised: 07/06/2019] [Accepted: 08/19/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the visual fields results obtained using the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm-Standard (SS) and the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm-Faster (SFR) in normal subjects, glaucoma suspects, and patients with glaucoma and to quantify potential time-saving benefits of the SFR algorithm. DESIGN Prospective, cross-sectional study. METHODS One randomly selected eye from 364 patients (77 normal subjects, 178 glaucoma suspects, and 109 patients with glaucoma) seen in a single institution underwent testing using both SS and SFR on the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Cumulative test time using each algorithm was compared after accounting for different rates of test reliability. Pointwise and cluster analysis was performed to determine whether there were systematic differences between algorithms. RESULTS Using SFR had a greater rate of unreliable results (29.3%) compared with SS (7.7%, P < .0001). This was mainly because of high false positive rates and seeding point errors. However, modeled test times showed that using SFR could obtain a greater number of reliable results within a shorter period of time. SFR resulted in higher sensitivity values (on average 0.5 dB for patients with glaucoma) that was greater under conditions of field loss (<19 dB). Cluster analysis showed no systematic patterns of sensitivity differences between algorithms. CONCLUSIONS After accounting for different rates of test reliability, SFR can result in significant time savings compared with SS. Clinicians should be cognizant of false positive rates and seeding point errors as common sources of error for SFR. Results between algorithms are not directly interchangeable, especially if there is a visual field deficit <19 dB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Phu
- Centre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales; School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales.
| | - Sieu K Khuu
- School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales
| | - Ashish Agar
- Centre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales; Department of Ophthalmology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales
| | - Michael Kalloniatis
- Centre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales; School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gardiner SK. Differences in the Relation Between Perimetric Sensitivity and Variability Between Locations Across the Visual Field. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2019; 59:3667-3674. [PMID: 30029253 PMCID: PMC6054428 DOI: 10.1167/iovs.18-24303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Perimetric sensitivities become more variable with glaucomatous functional loss. This study examines the extent to which this relation varies between locations, and whether this can be predicted by eccentricity-related differences in spatial summation. Methods Longitudinal series of visual fields from standard automated perimetry were obtained from participants with suspected or extant glaucoma. For each location in the 24-2 visual field, heterogeneous fixed-effects models were fit to the data, assuming that variability increased exponentially as sensitivity decreased. The predicted variability at each location was calculated when sensitivity was either 30 dB or 25 dB. Results Variability significantly increased with damage at all 52 locations. When sensitivity was 30 dB, variability increased with eccentricity, with P = 0.0003. The average SD was 1.54 dB at the four most central locations, versus 1.74 dB at the most peripheral locations. When sensitivity was 25 dB, variability did not vary predictably with eccentricity, with P = 0.340. The average SD was 2.36 dB at the four central locations, versus 2.24 dB at the most peripheral locations. Conclusions The relation between sensitivity and variability differed by eccentricity. Among healthy locations, variability was lower centrally, where the stimulus size is larger than Ricco's area, than peripherally. Among damaged locations, variability did not systematically vary with eccentricity. This could be because Ricco's area expands in glaucoma, such that stimuli were now smaller than this area at all locations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart K Gardiner
- Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Health, Portland, Oregon, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Maloca P, Hasler PW, Barthelmes D, Arnold P, Matthias M, Scholl HPN, Gerding H, Garweg J, Heeren T, Balaskas K, de Carvalho JER, Egan C, Tufail A, Zweifel SA. Safety and Feasibility of a Novel Sparse Optical Coherence Tomography Device for Patient-Delivered Retina Home Monitoring. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2018; 7:8. [PMID: 30050725 PMCID: PMC6058910 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.7.4.8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2018] [Accepted: 06/06/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To study a novel and fast optical coherence tomography (OCT) device for home-based monitoring in age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in a small sample yielding sparse OCT (spOCT) data and to compare the device to a commercially available reference device. Methods In this prospective study, both eyes of 31 participants with AMD were included. The subjects underwent scanning with an OCT prototype and a spectral-domain OCT to compare the accuracy of the central retinal thickness (CRT) measurements. Results Sixty-two eyes in 31 participants (21 females and 10 males) were included. The mean age was 79.6 years (age range, 69–92 years). The mean difference in the CRT measurements between the devices was 4.52 μm (SD ± 20.0 μm; range, −65.6 to 41.5 μm). The inter- and intrarater reliability coefficients of the OCT prototype were both >0.95. The laser power delivered was <0.54 mW for spOCT and <1.4 mW for SDOCT. No adverse events were reported, and the visual acuity before and after the measurements was stable. Conclusion This study demonstrated the safety and feasibility of this home-based OCT monitoring under real-life conditions, and it provided evidence for the potential clinical benefit of the device. Translational Relevance The newly developed spOCT is a valid and readily available retina scanner. It could be applied as a portable self-measuring OCT system. Its use may facilitate the sustainable monitoring of chronic retinal diseases by providing easily accessible and continuous retinal monitoring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Maloca
- OCTlab, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.,University of Basel, Department of Ophthalmology, Basel, Switzerland.,Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK
| | - Pascal W Hasler
- OCTlab, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.,University of Basel, Department of Ophthalmology, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Barthelmes
- University of Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.,Save Sight Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Patrik Arnold
- University of Applied Sciences Engineering and Information Technology, Institute for Human Centered Engineering OptoLab, Biel/Berne, Switzerland
| | - Mooser Matthias
- University of Applied Sciences Engineering and Information Technology, Institute for Human Centered Engineering OptoLab, Biel/Berne, Switzerland
| | - Hendrik P N Scholl
- Institute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.,University of Basel, Department of Ophthalmology, Basel, Switzerland.,Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Heinrich Gerding
- Pallas Kliniken AG, Olten, Switzerland.,Augenklinik der Universität Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Justus Garweg
- Berner Augenklinik am Lindenhofspital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Tjebo Heeren
- University College London, Institute of Ophthalmology, London, UK
| | - Konstantinos Balaskas
- Moorfields Ophthalmic Reading Centre, London, UK.,Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK
| | | | | | | | - Sandrine A Zweifel
- University of Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|