| Popis: |
The dry eye treatment outcome depends on the assessment of clinical relevance of the treatment effect. The potential approach to assess the clinical relevance of the treatment is to identify the symptoms responders and non-responders to the given treatments using the responder analysis. In our work, we have performed the responder analysis to assess the clinical relevance effect of the dry eye treatments namely, hot towel, EyeGiene®, and Blephasteam® twice daily and 12 min session of Lipiflow®. Thermography is performed at week 0 (baseline), at weeks 4 and 12 after treatment. The clinical parameters such as, change in the clinical irritations scores, tear break up time (TBUT), corneal staining and Schirmer’s symptoms tests values are used to obtain the responders and non-responders groups. We have obtained the infrared thermography images of dry eye symptoms responders and non-responders to the three types of warming treatments. The energy, kurtosis, skewness, mean, standard deviation, and various entropies namely Shannon, Renyi and Kapoor are extracted from responders and non-responders thermograms. The extracted features are ranked based on t -values. These ranked features are fed to the various classifiers to get the highest performance using minimum features. We have used decision tree (DT), K nearest neighbour (KNN), Naves Bayesian (NB) and support vector machine (SVM) to classify the features into responder and non-responder classes. We have obtained an average accuracy of 99.88%, sensitivity of 99.7% and specificity of 100% using KNN classifier using ten-fold cross validation. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect