Cargando…

Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools

Purpose: To introduce and validate hvf_extraction_script, an open-source software script for the automated extraction and structuring of metadata, value plot data, and percentile plot data from Humphrey visual field (HVF) report images. Methods: Validation was performed on 90 HVF reports over three...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Saifee, Murtaza, Wu, Jian, Liu, Yingna, Ma, Ping, Patlidanon, Jutima, Yu, Yinxi, Ying, Gui-Shuang, Han, Ying
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8116600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33996848
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.625487
_version_ 1783691429177982976
author Saifee, Murtaza
Wu, Jian
Liu, Yingna
Ma, Ping
Patlidanon, Jutima
Yu, Yinxi
Ying, Gui-Shuang
Han, Ying
author_facet Saifee, Murtaza
Wu, Jian
Liu, Yingna
Ma, Ping
Patlidanon, Jutima
Yu, Yinxi
Ying, Gui-Shuang
Han, Ying
author_sort Saifee, Murtaza
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To introduce and validate hvf_extraction_script, an open-source software script for the automated extraction and structuring of metadata, value plot data, and percentile plot data from Humphrey visual field (HVF) report images. Methods: Validation was performed on 90 HVF reports over three different report layouts, including a total of 1,530 metadata fields, 15,536 value plot data points, and 10,210 percentile data points, between the computer script and four human extractors, compared against DICOM reference data. Computer extraction and human extraction were compared on extraction time as well as accuracy of extraction for metadata, value plot data, and percentile plot data. Results: Computer extraction required 4.9-8.9 s per report, compared to the 6.5-19 min required by human extractors, representing a more than 40-fold difference in extraction speed. Computer metadata extraction error rate varied from an aggregate 1.2-3.5%, compared to 0.2-9.2% for human metadata extraction across all layouts. Computer value data point extraction had an aggregate error rate of 0.9% for version 1, <0.01% in version 2, and 0.15% in version 3, compared to 0.8-9.2% aggregate error rate for human extraction. Computer percentile data point extraction similarly had very low error rates, with no errors occurring in version 1 and 2, and 0.06% error rate in version 3, compared to 0.06-12.2% error rate for human extraction. Conclusions: This study introduces and validates hvf_extraction_script, an open-source tool for fast, accurate, automated data extraction of HVF reports to facilitate analysis of large-volume HVF datasets, and demonstrates the value of image processing tools in facilitating faster and cheaper large-volume data extraction in research settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8116600
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81166002021-05-14 Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools Saifee, Murtaza Wu, Jian Liu, Yingna Ma, Ping Patlidanon, Jutima Yu, Yinxi Ying, Gui-Shuang Han, Ying Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine Purpose: To introduce and validate hvf_extraction_script, an open-source software script for the automated extraction and structuring of metadata, value plot data, and percentile plot data from Humphrey visual field (HVF) report images. Methods: Validation was performed on 90 HVF reports over three different report layouts, including a total of 1,530 metadata fields, 15,536 value plot data points, and 10,210 percentile data points, between the computer script and four human extractors, compared against DICOM reference data. Computer extraction and human extraction were compared on extraction time as well as accuracy of extraction for metadata, value plot data, and percentile plot data. Results: Computer extraction required 4.9-8.9 s per report, compared to the 6.5-19 min required by human extractors, representing a more than 40-fold difference in extraction speed. Computer metadata extraction error rate varied from an aggregate 1.2-3.5%, compared to 0.2-9.2% for human metadata extraction across all layouts. Computer value data point extraction had an aggregate error rate of 0.9% for version 1, <0.01% in version 2, and 0.15% in version 3, compared to 0.8-9.2% aggregate error rate for human extraction. Computer percentile data point extraction similarly had very low error rates, with no errors occurring in version 1 and 2, and 0.06% error rate in version 3, compared to 0.06-12.2% error rate for human extraction. Conclusions: This study introduces and validates hvf_extraction_script, an open-source tool for fast, accurate, automated data extraction of HVF reports to facilitate analysis of large-volume HVF datasets, and demonstrates the value of image processing tools in facilitating faster and cheaper large-volume data extraction in research settings. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8116600/ /pubmed/33996848 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.625487 Text en Copyright © 2021 Saifee, Wu, Liu, Ma, Patlidanon, Yu, Ying and Han. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
Saifee, Murtaza
Wu, Jian
Liu, Yingna
Ma, Ping
Patlidanon, Jutima
Yu, Yinxi
Ying, Gui-Shuang
Han, Ying
Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title_full Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title_fullStr Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title_full_unstemmed Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title_short Development and Validation of Automated Visual Field Report Extraction Platform Using Computer Vision Tools
title_sort development and validation of automated visual field report extraction platform using computer vision tools
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8116600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33996848
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.625487
work_keys_str_mv AT saifeemurtaza developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT wujian developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT liuyingna developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT maping developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT patlidanonjutima developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT yuyinxi developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT yingguishuang developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools
AT hanying developmentandvalidationofautomatedvisualfieldreportextractionplatformusingcomputervisiontools