Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 29, 2025
Author Spotlight: Insights into Visual Cortex Research Through Wide-View fMRI Mapping
Published on: December 8, 2023
Data Preprocessing and Augmentation Improved Visual Field Prediction of Recurrent Neural Network with Multi-Central
Jeong Rye Park1, Sangil Kim2, Taehyeong Kim2
1Finance Fishery Manufacture Industrial Center on Big Data, Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Introduction:
The purpose of this study was to determine whether data preprocessing and augmentation could improve visual field (VF) prediction of recurrent neural network (RNN) with multi-central datasets.
Methods:
This retrospective study collected data from five glaucoma services between June 2004 and January 2021. From an initial dataset of 331,691 VFs, we considered reliable VF tests with fixed intervals. Since the VF monitoring interval is very variable, we applied data augmentation using multiple sets of data for patients with more than eight VFs. We obtained 5,430 VFs from 463 patients and 13,747 VFs from 1,076 patients by setting the fixed test interval to 365 ± 60 days (D = 365) and 180 ± 60 days (D = 180), respectively. Five consecutive VFs were provided to the constructed RNN as input and the 6th VF was compared with the output of the RNN. The performance of the periodic RNN (D = 365) was compared to that of an aperiodic RNN. The performance of the RNN with 6 long- and short-term memory (LSTM) cells (D = 180) was compared with that of the RNN with 5-LSTM cells. To compare the prediction performance, the root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) of the total deviation value (TDV) were calculated as accuracy metrics.
Results:
The performance of the periodic model (D = 365) improved significantly over aperiodic model. Overall prediction error (MAE) was 2.56 ± 0.46 dB versus 3.26 ± 0.41 dB (periodic vs. aperiodic) (p < 0.001). A higher perimetric frequency was better for predicting future VF. The overall prediction error (RMSE) was 3.15 ± 2.29 dB versus 3.42 ± 2.25 dB (D = 180 vs. D = 365). Increasing the number of input VFs improved the performance of VF prediction in D = 180 periodic model (3.15 ± 2.29 dB vs. 3.18 ± 2.34 dB, p < 0.001). The 6-LSTM in the D = 180 periodic model was more robust to worsening of VF reliability and disease severity. The prediction accuracy worsened as the false-negative rate increased and the mean deviation decreased.
Conclusion:
Data preprocessing with augmentation improved the VF prediction of the RNN model using multi-center datasets. The periodic RNN model predicted the future VF significantly better than the aperiodic RNN model.
