4.6 Article

Classification Criteria for Punctate Inner Choroiditis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 228, Issue -, Pages 275-280

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.03.046

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to establish classification criteria for punctate inner choroiditis (PIC) using machine learning. Key criteria for PIC included choroidal spots <250 μm in diameter, minimal or absent anterior chamber and vitreous inflammation, and involvement of the posterior pole and/or mid-periphery. The resulting criteria showed a low misclassification rate and could be useful in clinical and translational research.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine classification criteria for punctate inner choroiditis (PIC). DESIGN: Machine learning of cases with PIC and 8 other posterior uveitides. METHODS: Cases of posterior uveitides were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a fi-nal database was constructed of cases achieving superma-jority agreement on diagnosis by using formal consensus techniques. Cases were split into a training set and a val-idation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used in the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassifi-cation rate among the posterior uveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated in the validation set. RESULTS: A total of 1,068 cases of posterior uveitides, including 144 cases of PIC, were evaluated by machine learning. Key criteria for PIC included: 1) punctateappearing choroidal spots <250 mu m in diameter; 2) ab-sent to minimal anterior chamber and vitreous inflam- mation; and 3) involvement of the posterior pole with or without mid-periphery. Overall accuracy for posterior uveitides was 93.9% in the training set and 98.0% (95% confidence interval: 94.3-99.3) in the validation set. The misclassification rates for PIC were 15% in the training set and 9% in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for PIC had a reasonably low misclassification rate and appeared to perform suffi-ciently well for use in clinical and translational research. ((C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available