Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34574059›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Comparison of Different Machine Learning Classifiers for Glaucoma Diagnosis Based on Spectralis OCT.

Chao-Wei Wu, Hsiang-Li Shen, Chi-Jie Lu, Ssu-Han Chen, Hsin-Yi Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Chao-Wei WuGraduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City 807378, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-1060-9149
Hsiang-Li ShenGraduate Institute of Business Administration, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City 242062, Taiwan.
Chi-Jie LuGraduate Institute of Business Administration, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City 242062, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-7911-2253
Ssu-Han ChenDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ming Chi University of Technology, New Taipei City 243303, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-1186-3341
Hsin-Yi ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fu Jen Catholic University Hospital, New Taipei City 24352, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-1972-0844
Fu Jen Catholic University · TWKaohsiung Medical University · TWMing Chi University of Technology · TW

Funding

Fu Jen Catholic University Hospital PL-202008002-V
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early detection is important in glaucoma management. By using optical coherence tomography (OCT), the subtle structural changes caused by glaucoma can be detected. Though OCT provided abundant parameters for comprehensive information, clinicians may be confused once the results conflict. Machine learning classifiers (MLCs) are good tools for considering numerous parameters and generating reliable diagnoses in glaucoma practice. Here we aim to compare different MLCs based on Spectralis OCT parameters, including circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (cRNFL) thickness, Bruch's membrane opening-minimum rim width (BMO-MRW), Early Treatment Diabetes Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) macular thickness, and posterior pole asymmetry analysis (PPAA), in discriminating normal from glaucomatous eyes. Five MLCs were proposed, namely conditional inference trees (CIT), logistic model tree (LMT), C5.0 decision tree, random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). Logistic regression (LGR) was used as a benchmark for comparison. RF was shown to be the best model. Ganglion cell layer measurements were the most important predictors in early glaucoma detection and cRNFL measurements were more important as the glaucoma severity increased. The global, temporal, inferior, superotemporal, and inferotemporal sites were relatively influential locations among all parameters. Clinicians should cautiously integrate the Spectralis OCT results into the entire clinical picture when diagnosing glaucoma.

Indexed as

glaucomamachine learningoptical coherence tomography (OCT)

Identifiers

PMID34574059
PMCPMC8471622
OpenAlexW3199035829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.