Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/182499
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorRuiz Hidalgo, Irenees_ES
dc.contributor.authorRozema, J. J.es_ES
dc.contributor.authorSaad, A.es_ES
dc.contributor.authorGatinel, D.es_ES
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez, Pabloes_ES
dc.contributor.authorZakaria, N.es_ES
dc.contributor.authorKoppen, Carinaes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-27T12:15:08Z-
dc.date.available2019-05-27T12:15:08Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationCornea 36(6): 689-695 (2017)es_ES
dc.identifier.issn0277-3740-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/182499-
dc.description.abstract[Purpose]: To validate a recently developed program for automatic and objective keratoconus detection (Keratoconus Assistant [KA]) by applying it to a new population and comparing it with other methods described in the literature.es_ES
dc.description.abstract[Methods]: KA uses machine learning and 25 Pentacam-derived parameters to classify eyes into subgroups, such as keratoconus, keratoconus suspect, postrefractive surgery, and normal eyes. To validate this program, it was applied to 131 eyes diagnosed separately by experienced corneal specialists from 2 different centers (Fondation Rothschild, Paris, and Antwerp University Hospital [UZA]). The agreement of the KA classification with 7 other indices from the literature was assessed using interrater reliability and confusion matrices. The agreement of the 2 clinical classifications was also assessed.es_ES
dc.description.abstract[Results]: For keratoconus, KA agreed in 92.6% of cases with the clinical diagnosis by UZA and in 98.0% of cases with the diagnosis by Rothschild. In keratoconus suspect and forme fruste detection, KA agreed in 65.2% (UZA) and 100% (Rothschild) of cases with the clinical assessments. This corresponds with a moderate agreement with a clinical assessment (κ = 0.594 and κ = 0.563 for Rothschild and UZA, respectively). The agreement with the other classification methods ranged from moderate (κ = 0.432; Score) to low (κ = 0.158; KISA%). Both clinical assessments agreed substantially (κ = 0.759) with each other.es_ES
dc.description.abstract[Conclusions]: KA is effective at detecting early keratoconus and agrees with trained clinical judgment. As keratoconus detection depends on the method used, we recommend using multiple methods side by side.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinses_ES
dc.rightsclosedAccesses_ES
dc.titleValidation of an objective Keratoconus detection system implemented in a scheimpflug tomographer and comparison with other methodses_ES
dc.typeartículoes_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/ICO.0000000000001194-
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer reviewedes_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000001194es_ES
dc.identifier.e-issn1536-4798-
dc.relation.csices_ES
oprm.item.hasRevisionno ko 0 false*
dc.identifier.pmid28368992-
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501es_ES
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeartículo-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
Aparece en las colecciones: (ICMA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
accesoRestringido.pdf59,24 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Show simple item record

CORE Recommender

PubMed Central
Citations

18
checked on 28-abr-2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

54
checked on 02-may-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

34
checked on 25-feb-2024

Page view(s)

184
checked on 05-may-2024

Download(s)

19
checked on 05-may-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Artículos relacionados:


NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.