Gomes Ramon Hernany Martins, Perger Edson Luiz Pontes, Vasques Lucas Hecker, Gagete Elaine, Simões Rafael Plana
Department of Bioprocess and Biotechnology, School of Agriculture, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Avenue Universitária, 3780, Botucatu 18610-034, SP, Brazil.
Medical School, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Avenue Prof. Mário Rubens Guimarães Montenegro, s/n, Botucatu 18618-687, SP, Brazil.
Life (Basel). 2024 Oct 2;14(10):1256. doi: 10.3390/life14101256.
The skin prick test (SPT) is used to diagnose sensitization to antigens. This study proposes a deep learning approach to infer wheal dimensions, aiming to reduce dependence on human interpretation.
A dataset of SPT images (n = 5844) was used to infer a convolutional neural network for wheal segmentation (). Three methods for inferring wheal dimensions were evaluated: the ; the standard protocol (); and approximation of the area as an ellipse using diameters measured by an allergist (). The results were compared with assisted image segmentation (), the most accurate method. Bland-Altman analysis, distribution analyses, and correlation tests were applied to compare the methods. This study also compared the percentage deviation among these methods in determining the area of wheals with regular geometric shapes (n = 150) and with irregular shapes (n = 150).
The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the difference between methods was not correlated with the absolute area. The achieved a segmentation accuracy of 85.88% and a strong correlation with the method (ρ = 0.88), outperforming all other methods. Additionally, showed significant error (13.44 ± 13.95%) for pseudopods.
The protocol can potentially automate the reading of SPT, offering greater accuracy than the standard protocol.
皮肤点刺试验(SPT)用于诊断对抗原的致敏反应。本研究提出一种深度学习方法来推断风团尺寸,旨在减少对人工判读的依赖。
使用一个SPT图像数据集(n = 5844)来推断用于风团分割的卷积神经网络()。评估了三种推断风团尺寸的方法:;标准方案();以及使用过敏症专科医生测量的直径将面积近似为椭圆()。将结果与辅助图像分割()进行比较,辅助图像分割是最准确的方法。应用布兰德-奥特曼分析、分布分析和相关性检验来比较这些方法。本研究还比较了这些方法在确定规则几何形状(n = 150)和不规则形状(n = 150)风团面积时的百分比偏差。
布兰德-奥特曼分析表明,各方法之间的差异与绝对面积无关。实现了85.88%的分割准确率,并且与方法具有很强的相关性(ρ = 0.88),优于所有其他方法。此外,对于伪足显示出显著误差(13.44 ± 13.95%)。
方案有可能使SPT判读自动化,比标准方案具有更高的准确性。