Dataset Information

Development of a system based on artificial intelligence to identify visual problems in children: study protocol of the TrackAI project.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Around 70% to 80% of the 19 million visually disabled children in the world are due to a preventable or curable disease, if detected early enough. Vision screening in childhood is an evidence-based and cost-effective way to detect visual disorders. However, current screening programmes face several limitations: training required to perform them efficiently, lack of accurate screening tools and poor collaboration from young children.Some of these limitations can be overcome by new digital tools. Implementing a system based on artificial intelligence systems avoid the challenge of interpreting visual outcomes.The objective of the TrackAI Project is to develop a system to identify children with visual disorders. The system will have two main components: a novel visual test implemented in a digital device, DIVE (Device for an Integral Visual Examination); and artificial intelligence algorithms that will run on a smartphone to analyse automatically the visual data gathered by DIVE.

Methods and analysis

This is a multicentre study, with at least five centres located in five geographically diverse study sites participating in the recruitment, covering Europe, USA and Asia.The study will include children aged between 6 months and 14 years, both with normal or abnormal visual development.The project will be divided in two consecutive phases: design and training of an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to identify visual problems, and system development and validation. The study protocol will consist of a comprehensive ophthalmological examination, performed by an experienced paediatric ophthalmologist, and an exam of the visual function using a DIVE.For the first part of the study, diagnostic labels will be given to each DIVE exam to train the neural network. For the validation, diagnosis provided by ophthalmologists will be compared with AI system outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination

The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of Good Clinical Practice. This protocol was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Aragón, CEICA, on January 2019 (Code PI18/346).Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated in scientific meetings.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN17316993.

SUBMITTER: Pueyo V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7044912 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo quantify the central visual field (VF) loss patterns in glaucoma using artificial intelligence.DesignRetrospective study.ParticipantsVFs of 8712 patients with 13 951 Humphrey 10-2 test results from 13 951 eyes for cross-sectional analyses, and 824 patients with at least 5 reliable 10-2 test results at 6-month intervals or more from 1191 eyes for longitudinal analyses.MethodsTotal deviation values were used to determine the central VF patterns using the most recent 10-2 test results. A 24-2 VF within a 3-month window of the 10-2 tests was used to stage eyes into mild, moderate, or severe functional loss using the Hodapp-Anderson-Parrish scale at baseline. Archetypal analysis was applied to determine the central VF patterns. Cross-validation was performed to determine the optimal number of patterns. Stepwise regression was applied to select the optimal feature combination of global indices, average baseline decomposition coefficients from central VFs archetypes, and other factors to predict central VF mean deviation (MD) slope based on the Bayesian information criterion (BIC).Main outcome measuresThe central VF patterns stratified by severity stage based on 24-2 test results and a model to predict the central VF MD change over time using baseline test results.ResultsFrom cross-sectional analysis, 17 distinct central VF patterns were determined for the 13 951 eyes across the spectrum of disease severity. These central VF patterns could be divided into isolated superior loss, isolated inferior loss, diffuse loss, and other loss patterns. Notably, 4 of the 5 patterns of diffuse VF loss preserved the less vulnerable inferotemporal zone, whereas they lost most of the remaining more vulnerable zone described by the Hood model. Inclusion of coefficients from central VF archetypical patterns strongly improved the prediction of central VF MD slope (BIC decrease, 35; BIC decrease of >6 indicating strong prediction improvement) than using only the global indices of 2 baseline VF results. Eyes with baseline VF results with more superonasal and inferonasal loss were more likely to show worsening MD over time.ConclusionsWe quantified central VF patterns in glaucoma, which were used to improve the prediction of central VF worsening compared with using only global indices.

Project description:ImportancePhysicians are required to work with rapidly growing amounts of medical data. Approximately 62% of time per patient is devoted to reviewing electronic health records (EHRs), with clinical data review being the most time-consuming portion.ObjectiveTo determine whether an artificial intelligence (AI) system developed to organize and display new patient referral records would improve a clinician's ability to extract patient information compared with the current standard of care.Design, setting, and participantsIn this prognostic study, an AI system was created to organize patient records and improve data retrieval. To evaluate the system on time and accuracy, a nonblinded, prospective study was conducted at a single academic medical center. Recruitment emails were sent to all physicians in the gastroenterology division, and 12 clinicians agreed to participate. Each of the clinicians participating in the study received 2 referral records: 1 AI-optimized patient record and 1 standard (non-AI-optimized) patient record. For each record, clinicians were asked 22 questions requiring them to search the assigned record for clinically relevant information. Clinicians reviewed records from June 1 to August 30, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe time required to answer each question, along with accuracy, was measured for both records, with and without AI optimization. Participants were asked to assess overall satisfaction with the AI system, their preferred review method (AI-optimized vs standard), and other topics to assess clinical utility.ResultsTwelve gastroenterology physicians/fellows completed the study. Compared with standard (non-AI-optimized) patient record review, the AI system saved first-time physician users 18% of the time used to answer the clinical questions (10.5 [95% CI, 8.5-12.6] vs 12.8 [95% CI, 9.4-16.2] minutes; P = .02). There was no significant decrease in accuracy when physicians retrieved important patient information (83.7% [95% CI, 79.3%-88.2%] with the AI-optimized vs 86.0% [95% CI, 81.8%-90.2%] without the AI-optimized record; P = .81). Survey responses from physicians were generally positive across all questions. Eleven of 12 physicians (92%) preferred the AI-optimized record review to standard review. Despite a learning curve pointed out by respondents, 11 of 12 physicians believed that the technology would save them time to assess new patient records and were interested in using this technology in their clinic.Conclusions and relevanceIn this prognostic study, an AI system helped physicians extract relevant patient information in a shorter time while maintaining high accuracy. This finding is particularly germane to the ever-increasing amounts of medical data and increased stressors on clinicians. Increased user familiarity with the AI system, along with further enhancements in the system itself, hold promise to further improve physician data extraction from large quantities of patient health records.