Quantitative Biology > Quantitative Methods
[Submitted on 11 Mar 2024]
Title:Applicability of oculomics for individual risk prediction: Repeatability and robustness of retinal Fractal Dimension using DART and AutoMorph
View PDFAbstract:Purpose: To investigate whether Fractal Dimension (FD)-based oculomics could be used for individual risk prediction by evaluating repeatability and robustness. Methods: We used two datasets: Caledonia, healthy adults imaged multiple times in quick succession for research (26 subjects, 39 eyes, 377 colour fundus images), and GRAPE, glaucoma patients with baseline and follow-up visits (106 subjects, 196 eyes, 392 images). Mean follow-up time was 18.3 months in GRAPE, thus it provides a pessimistic lower-bound as vasculature could change. FD was computed with DART and AutoMorph. Image quality was assessed with QuickQual, but no images were initially excluded. Pearson, Spearman, and Intraclass Correlation (ICC) were used for population-level repeatability. For individual-level repeatability, we introduce measurement noise parameter {\lambda} which is within-eye Standard Deviation (SD) of FD measurements in units of between-eyes SD. Results: In Caledonia, ICC was 0.8153 for DART and 0.5779 for AutoMorph, Pearson/Spearman correlation (first and last image) 0.7857/0.7824 for DART, and 0.3933/0.6253 for AutoMorph. In GRAPE, Pearson/Spearman correlation (first and next visit) was 0.7479/0.7474 for DART, and 0.7109/0.7208 for AutoMorph (all p<0.0001). Median {\lambda} in Caledonia without exclusions was 3.55\% for DART and 12.65\% for AutoMorph, and improved to up to 1.67\% and 6.64\% with quality-based exclusions, respectively. Quality exclusions primarily mitigated large outliers. Worst quality in an eye correlated strongly with {\lambda} (Pearson 0.5350-0.7550, depending on dataset and method, all p<0.0001). Conclusions: Repeatability was sufficient for individual-level predictions in heterogeneous populations. DART performed better on all metrics and might be able to detect small, longitudinal changes, highlighting the potential of robust methods.
Submission history
From: Justin Engelmann [view email][v1] Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:34:51 UTC (1,105 KB)
Current browse context:
cs
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.