2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.cont.2022.100245
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

133 Can We Spare Pressure-Flow Studies? Uroflowmetry Pattern Recognition Using Computational Processing: Preliminary Results.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…16 A different approach used raw data from male LUTS patients' uroflowmetries to predict DU, applying the partial least squares regression algorithm, with an AUC of 0.80 and an optimum sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 85%. 17 Such studies have used both flow curve shape and standard uroflowmetry parameters, but these algorithms still have not reached adequate robustness and reliability to substitute for conventional uroflowmetry and pressure-flow studies.…”
Section: Potential For Reduction Of Variability In Diagnosis Between ...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…16 A different approach used raw data from male LUTS patients' uroflowmetries to predict DU, applying the partial least squares regression algorithm, with an AUC of 0.80 and an optimum sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 85%. 17 Such studies have used both flow curve shape and standard uroflowmetry parameters, but these algorithms still have not reached adequate robustness and reliability to substitute for conventional uroflowmetry and pressure-flow studies.…”
Section: Potential For Reduction Of Variability In Diagnosis Between ...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A convolutional neural network (VGG16 model) was applied to conventional uroflowmetries of a cohort of male patients with LUTS to predict bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) and detrusor underactivity (DU), showing an AUC of 0.73 and 0.72, respectively 16 . A different approach used raw data from male LUTS patients' uroflowmetries to predict DU, applying the partial least squares regression algorithm, with an AUC of 0.80 and an optimum sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 85% 17 . Such studies have used both flow curve shape and standard uroflowmetry parameters, but these algorithms still have not reached adequate robustness and reliability to substitute for conventional uroflowmetry and pressure‐flow studies.…”
Section: Applying ML To Uroflowmetry and Cystometry Datamentioning
confidence: 99%