Zignoli A, Fornasiero A, Rota P, Muollo V, Peyré-Tartaruga L A, Low D A, Fontana F Y, Besson D, Pühringer M, Ring-Dimitriou S, Mourot L
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
CeRiSM Research Centre, University of Verona, Trento, Italy.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2022 Mar;22(3):425-435. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1866081. Epub 2021 Jan 31.
The problem of the automatic determination of the first and second ventilatory thresholds (VT1 and VT2) from cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) still leads to controversy. The reliability of the gold standard methodology (i.e. expert visual inspection) feeds into the debate and several authors call for more objective automatic methods to be used in the clinical practice. In this study, we present a framework based on a collaborative approach, where a web-application was used to crowd-source a large number (1245) of CPET data of individuals with different aerobic fitness. The resulting database was used to train and test an artificial intelligence (i.e. a convolutional neural network) algorithm. This automatic classifier is currently implemented in another web-application and was used to detect the ventilatory thresholds in the available CPET. A total of 206 CPET were used to evaluate the accuracy of the estimations against the expert opinions. The neural network was able to detect the ventilatory thresholds with an average mean absolute error of 178 (198) mlO/min (11.1%, = 0.97) and 144 (149) mlO/min (6.1%, = 0.99), for VT1 and VT2 respectively. The performance of the neural network in detecting VT1 deteriorated in case of individuals with poor aerobic fitness. Our results suggest the potential for a collective intelligence system to outperform isolated experts in ventilatory thresholds detection. However, the inclusion of a larger number of VT1 examples certified by a community of experts will be likely needed before the abilities of this collective intelligence can be translated into the clinical use of CPET.
通过心肺运动试验(CPET)自动确定第一和第二通气阈值(VT1和VT2)的问题仍然存在争议。金标准方法(即专家目视检查)的可靠性引发了这场争论,一些作者呼吁在临床实践中使用更客观的自动方法。在本研究中,我们提出了一个基于协作方法的框架,其中使用一个网络应用程序众包大量(1245个)不同有氧适能个体的CPET数据。所得数据库用于训练和测试一种人工智能(即卷积神经网络)算法。这种自动分类器目前在另一个网络应用程序中实现,并用于检测可用CPET中的通气阈值。总共206份CPET用于根据专家意见评估估计的准确性。神经网络能够检测通气阈值,对于VT1和VT2,平均平均绝对误差分别为178(198)mlO/min(11.1%,=0.97)和144(149)mlO/min(6.1%,=0.99)。对于有氧适能较差的个体,神经网络检测VT1的性能会下降。我们的结果表明,集体智能系统在通气阈值检测方面有可能优于孤立的专家。然而,在这种集体智能的能力能够转化为CPET的临床应用之前,可能需要纳入更多由专家群体认证的VT1示例。