Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Glaucoma disease in humans can lead to blindness if it progresses to the point where it affects the oculus' optic nerve head. It is not easily detected since there are no symptoms, but it can be detected using tonometry, ophthalmoscopy, and perimeter. However, advances in artificial intelligence approaches have permitted machine learning techniques to diagnose at an early stage. Numerous methods have been proposed using Machine Learning to diagnose glaucoma with different data sets and techniques but these are complex methods. Although, medical imaging instruments are used as glaucoma screening methods, fundus imaging specifically is the most used screening technique for glaucoma detection. This study presents a novel DenseNet and DarkNet combination to classify normal and glaucoma affected fundus image. These frameworks have been trained and tested on three data sets of high-resolution fundus (HRF), RIM 1, and ACRIMA. A total of 658 images have been used for healthy eyes and 612 images for glaucoma-affected eyes classification. It has also been observed that the fusion of DenseNet and DarkNet outperforms the two CNN networks and achieved 99.7% accuracy, 98.9% sensitivity, 100% specificity for the HRF database. In contrast, for the RIM1 database, 89.3% accuracy, 93.3% sensitivity, 88.46% specificity has been attained. Moreover, for the ACRIMA database, 99% accuracy, 100% sensitivity, 99% specificity has been achieved. Therefore, the proposed method is robust and efficient with less computational time and complexity compared to the literature available.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jemt.24083 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!