4.5 Article

Artificial neural network classification of pharyngeal high-resolution manometry with impedance data

Journal

LARYNGOSCOPE
Volume 123, Issue 3, Pages 713-720

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/lary.23655

Keywords

Artificial neural network; classification model; high-resolution manometry; impedance; aspiration; dysphagia

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health from the National Institute on Deafness and other Communicative Disorders [R21 DC011130A, T32 DC009401]
  2. NHMRC [1009344]
  3. Thrasher Research Fund, Salt Lake City, Utah

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives/Hypothesis: To use classification algorithms to classify swallows as safe, penetration, or aspiration based on measurements obtained from pharyngeal high-resolution manometry (HRM) with impedance. Study Design: Case series evaluating new method of data analysis. Methods: Multilayer perceptron, an artificial neural network (ANN), was evaluated for its ability to classify swallows as safe, penetration, or aspiration. Data were collected from 25 disordered subjects swallowing 5- or 10-mL boluses. Following extraction of relevant parameters, a subset of the data was used to train the models, and the remaining swallows were then independently classified by the ANN. Results: A classification accuracy of 89.4 +/- 2.4% was achieved when including all parameters. Including only manometry-related parameters yielded a classification accuracy of 85.0 +/- 6.0%, whereas including only impedance-related parameters yielded a classification accuracy of 76.0 +/- 4.9%. Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded areas under the curve of 0.8912 for safe, 0.8187 for aspiration, and 0.8014 for penetration. Conclusions: Classification models show high accuracy in classifying swallows from dysphagic patients as safe or unsafe. HRM-impedance with ANN represents one method that could be used clinically to screen for patients at risk for penetration or aspiration. Laryngoscope, 2013

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available