Introduction to Machine Learning for Ophthalmologists

References

• Gr Graham B Kaggle diabetic retinopathy detection competition report. University of Warwick. https://kaggle2.blob.core.windows.net/forum-message-attachments/88655/2795/competitionreport.pdf Accessed 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Zheng C, Rashid N, Wu Y, et al. Using natural language processing and machine learning to identify gout flares from electronic clinical notes. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(11):1740–1748. doi:10.1002/acr.22324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danielewska ME, Iskander DR, Krzyzanowska-Berkowska P. Age-related changes in corneal pulsation: ocular dicrotism. Optom Vis Sci. 2014;91(1):54–59. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000000113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futoma J, Sendak M, Cameron CB, Heller K Predicting disease progression with a model for multivariate longitudinal clinical data. Proceedings of the 1st Machine Learning for Healthcare Conference, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Dhar V. Data science and prediction. Commun ACM. 2013;56(12):64–73. doi:10.1145/2500499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russel S, Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. EUA: Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ, USA; 2013
   Google Scholar
• Samuel AL. Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM J Res Dev. 1959;3(3):210–229. doi:10.1147/rd.33.0210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohavi R, Provost F. Glossary of terms. Mach Learn. 1998;30(2–3):271–274. doi:10.1023/A:1017181826899.
   Google Scholar
• Jain AK, Murty MN, Flynn PJ. Data clustering: a review. ACM Comput Surv. 1999;31(3):264–323. doi:10.1145/331499.331504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Zhang C, Yang Q. Data preparation for data mining. Appl Artif Intell. 2003;17(5–6):375–381. doi:10.1080/713827180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodge V, Austin J. A survey of outlier detection methodologies. Artif Intell Rev. 2004;22(2):85–126. doi:10.1023/B:AIRE.0000045502.10941.a9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiff GD, Volk LA, Volodarskaya M, et al. Screening for medication errors using an outlier detection system. J Am Med Inf Assoc. 2017;24(2):281–287.doi:10.1093/jamia/ocw171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen T, Guestrin C Xgboost: a scalable tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining; ACM, California, USA; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Little RJ, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. John Wiley & Sons, USA; 2014
   Google Scholar
• Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc B. 1977:1–38. jstor.org/stable/2984875.
   Google Scholar
• Donders ART, van der Heijden GJMG, Stijnen T, Moons KG. Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1087–1091. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batista GE, Monard MC. An analysis of four missing data treatment methods for supervised learning. Appl Artif Intell. 2003;17(5–6):519–533. doi:10.1080/713827181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu L, Liu H. Efficient feature selection via analysis of relevance and redundancy. J Mach Learn Res. 2004;5:1205–1224. http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume5/yu04a/yu04a.pdf.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harman HH. Modern Factor Analysis. University of Chicago press, Chicago, USA; 1960
   Google Scholar
• Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc B. 1996:267–288. jstor.org/stable/2346178.
   Google Scholar
• Jain A, Zongker D. Feature selection: evaluation, application, and small sample performance. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1997;19(2):153–158. doi:10.1109/34.574797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guyon I, Elisseeff A. An introduction to variable and feature selection. J Mach Learn Res. 2003;3:1157–1182. http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume3/guyon03a/guyon03a.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Koller D, Sahami M Toward optimal feature selection. Technical Report. Stanford InfoLab, USA; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Jolliffe I. Principal Component Analysis. Wiley Online Library, USA; 2002
   Google Scholar
• Saeys Y, Inza I, Larrañaga P. A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics. Bioinformatics. 2007;23(19):2507–2517. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinlan JR. Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn. 1986;1(1):81–106. doi:10.1007/BF00116251.
   Google Scholar
• Rozema JJ, Zakaria N, Ruiz Hidalgo I, Jongenelen S, Tassignon MJ, Koppen C. How abnormal is the noncorneal biometry of keratoconic eyes? Cornea. 2016;35(6):860–865. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000000802.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn. 2001;45(1):5–32. doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman JH. Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann Stat. 2001;29:1189–1232. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2699986.pdf?casa_token=CAenytmOR3wAAAAA:DLOKBG6D_lzsYx-XCvSDgfpkam3KNhbnscFM1EckLTYQ4jCwieE8RJ7frGaKMm-vXuA0Xd3zuFO_SXfPda0Lgv6slqKsdje3gRPoyQfJr1gae8IXZA.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haykin S. Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. Prentice Hall PTR, NJ, USA; 2004
   Google Scholar
• Olazaran M. A sociological study of the official history of the perceptrons controversy. Soc Stud Sci. 1996;26(3):611–659. doi:10.1177/030631296026003005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szegedy C, Vanhoucke V, Ioffe S, Shlens J, Wojna Z Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Nevada, USA; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Hinton G, Deng L, Yu D, et al. Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition: the shared views of four research groups. IEEE Signal Process Mag. 2012;29(6):82–97. doi:10.1109/MSP.2012.2205597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahdanau D, Cho K, Bengio Y. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) 2015. San Diego, CA, USA arXiv:14090473. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Shazeer N, Mirhoseini A, Maziarz K, et al. Outrageously large neural networks: the sparsely-gated mixture-of-experts layer. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) 2017. Toulon, France arXiv:170106538. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Kohonen T. Self-organizing map. Proc IEEE. 1990;78:1464–1480. doi:10.1109/5.58325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langley P, Sage S Induction of selective Bayesian classifiers. Proceedings of the Tenth international conference on Uncertainty in artificial intelligence; Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Hand DJ, Yu K. Idiot’s Bayes—not so stupid after all? Int Stat Rev. 2001;69(3):385–398. doi:10.2307/1403452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Airoldi EM. Getting started in probabilistic graphical models. PLoS Comput Biol. 2007;3(12):e252. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burges CJ. A tutorial on support vector machines for pattern recognition. Data Min Knowl Discov. 1998;2(2):121–167. doi:10.1023/A:1009715923555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotsiantis SB, Zaharakis I, Pintelas P. Supervised machine learning: a review of classification techniques. Informatica. 2007;31:249–268. http://www.informatica.si/index.php/informatica/article/viewFile/148/140.
   Google Scholar
• Cortes C, Vapnik V. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn. 1995;20(3):273–297. doi:10.1023/A:1022627411411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann T, Schölkopf B, Smola AJ. Kernel methods in machine learning. Ann Stat. 2008;36:1171–1220. doi:10.1214/009053607000000677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abakar KA, Yu C. Performance of SVM based on PUK kernel in comparison to SVM based on RBF kernel in prediction of yarn tenacity. Ijftr. 2014;39:55–59. http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/27358/1/IJFTR%2039(1)%2055-59.pdf.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teknomo K. K-means clustering tutorial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2006;100:3.
   Google Scholar
• Ding C, He X K-means clustering via principal component analysis. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning, Banff, Alberta, Canada; 2004, 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Amancio DR, Comin CH, Casanova D, et al. A systematic comparison of supervised classifiers. PloS one. 2014;9(4):e94137. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melcer T, Danielewska ME, Iskander DR. Wavelet representation of the corneal pulse for detecting ocular dicrotism. PloS one. 2015;10(4):e0124721. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanczar B, Hua J, Sima C, Weinstein J, Bittner M, Dougherty ER. Small-sample precision of ROC-related estimates. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(6):822–830. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lobo JM, Jiménez‐Valverde A, Real R. AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2008;17(2):145–151. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00358.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone M. Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. J R Stat Soc B. 1974:111–147. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2984809.
   Google Scholar
• Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat. 1979;7:1–26. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344552.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachenbruch PA, Mickey MR. Estimation of error rates in discriminant analysis. Technometrics. 1968;10(1):1–11. doi:10.2307/1266219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohavi R A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Montreal, Canada; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Goldbaum MH, Sample PA, White H, Weinreb R. Discrimination of normal and glaucomatous visual fields by neural network. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:503.
   Google Scholar
• Goldbaum MH, Sample PA, White H, et al. Interpretation of automated perimetry for glaucoma by neural network. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:3362–3373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldbaum MH, Sample PA, Chan K, et al. Comparing machine learning classifiers for diagnosing glaucoma from standard automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:162–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lietman T, Eng J, Katz J, Quigley HA. Neural networks for visual field analysis: how do they compare with other algorithms?. J Glaucoma. 1999;8:77–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henson DB, Spenceley SE, Bull DR. Spatial classification of glaucomatous visual field loss. Br J Ophthalmol. Jun 1996;80(6):526–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowd C, Chan K, Zangwill LM, et al. Comparing neural networks and linear discriminant functions for glaucoma detection using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy of the optic disc. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:3444–3454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang M, Chen H. Development and comparison of automated classifiers for glaucoma diagnosis using Stratus optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(11):4121–4129. doi:10.1167/iovs.05-0069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang M, Chen H, Lin J. Rule extraction for glaucoma detection with summary data from StratusOCT. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48(1):244–250. doi:10.1167/iovs.06-0320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgansky-Eliash Z, Wollstein G, Chu T, et al. Optical coherence tomography machine learning classifiers for glaucoma detection: a preliminary study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(11):4147–4152. doi:10.1167/iovs.05-0366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khalil T, Khalid S, Syed AM Review of machine learning techniques for glaucoma detection and prediction. Science and Information Conference (SAI), IEEE, London, United Kingdom; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar BN, Chauhan R, Dahiya N. Detection of glaucoma using image processing techniques: a critique. Semin Ophthalmol. 2018;33(2):275–283. doi:10.1080/08820538.2016.1229801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldbaum MH, Jang GJ, Bowd C, et al. Patterns of glaucomatous visual field loss in sita fields automatically identified using independent component analysis. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2009;107:136–144.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elze T, Pasquale LR, Shen LQ, Chen TC, Wiggs JL, Bex PJ. Patterns of functional vision loss in glaucoma determined with archetypal analysis. J R Soc Interface. 2015;12:103. doi:10.1098/rsif.2014.1118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yousefi S, Balasubramanian M, Goldbaum MH, et al. Unsupervised Gaussian mixture-model with expectation maximization for detecting glaucomatous progression in standard automated perimetry visual fields. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2016;5(3):2. doi:10.1167/tvst.5.3.2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asaoka R, Hirasawa K, Iwase A, et al. Validating the usefulness of the “Random Forests” classifier to diagnose early glaucoma with optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;174:95–103. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2016.11.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowd C, Zangwill LM, Medeiros FA, et al. Confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy classifiers and stereophotograph evaluation for prediction of visual field abnormalities in glaucoma-suspect eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45(7):2255–2262. doi:10.1167/iovs.03-1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson TH, Keating D. Telemedicine and computers in diabetic retinopathy screening. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:5–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner GG, Keating D, Williamson TH, Elliott AT. Automatic detection of diabetic retinopathy using an artificial neural network: a screening tool. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:940–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jelinek HF, Rocha A, Carvalho T, Goldenstein S, Wainer J Machine learning and pattern classification in identification of indigenous retinal pathology. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE, Boston, MA, USA; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Niemeijer M, van Ginneken B, Russell SR, Suttorp-Schulten MS, Abramoff MD. Automated detection and differentiation of drusen, exudates, and cotton-wool spots in digital color fundus photographs for diabetic retinopathy diagnosis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48(5):2260–2267. doi:10.1167/iovs.06-0996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sopharak A, Dailey MN, Uyyanonvara B, et al. Machine learning approach to automatic exudate detection in retinal images from diabetic patients. J Mod Opt. 2010;57(2):124–135. doi:10.1080/09500340903118517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usher D, Dumskyj M, Himaga M, Williamson TH, Nussey S, Boyce J. Automated detection of diabetic retinopathy in digital retinal images: a tool for diabetic retinopathy screening. Diabet Med. 2004;21(1):84–90. doi:10.1046/j.1464-5491.2003.01085.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yun WL, Acharya UR, Venkatesh YV, Chee C, Min LC, Ng EYK. Identification of different stages of diabetic retinopathy using retinal optical images. Inf Sci. 2008;178(1):106–121. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2007.07.020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roychowdhury S, Koozekanani DD, Parhi KK. Dream: diabetic retinopathy analysis using machine learning. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2014;18(5):1717–1728. doi:10.1109/JBHI.2013.2294635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acharya UR, Lim CM, Ng EYK, Chee C, Tamura T. Computer-based detection of diabetes retinopathy stages using digital fundus images. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2009;223(5):545–553. doi:10.1243/09544119JEIM486.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Quellec G, Lamard M, Abràmoff MD, et al. A multiple-instance learning framework for diabetic retinopathy screening. Med Image Anal. 2012;16(6):1228–1240. doi:10.1016/j.media.2012.06.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulshan V, Peng L, Coram M, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs. Jama. 2016;316(22):2402–2410. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.17216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abràmoff MD, Lou Y, Erginay A, et al. Improved automated detection of diabetic retinopathy on a publicly available dataset through integration of deep learning. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016;57(13):5200–5206. doi:10.1167/iovs.16-19964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gargeya R, Leng T. Automated identification of diabetic retinopathy using deep learning. Ophthalmology. 2017;124(7):962–969. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.02.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jani PD, Forbes L, Choudhury A, Preisser JS, Viera AJ, Garg S. Evaluation of diabetic retinal screening and factors for ophthalmology referral in a telemedicine network. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017;135(7):706–714. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.1150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mookiah MRK, Acharya UR, Chua CK, Lim CM, Ng E, Laude A. Computer-aided diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy: a review. Comput Biol Med. 2013;43(12):2136–2155. doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2013.10.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahmiri S, Boukadoum M. Automated detection of circinate exudates in retina digital images using empirical mode decomposition and the entropy and uniformity of the intrinsic mode functions. Biomed Eng Tech. 2014;59(4):357–366. doi:10.1515/bmt-2013-0082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mookiah MRK, Acharya UR, Koh JEW, et al. Decision support system for age-related macular degeneration using discrete wavelet transform. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2014;52(9):781–796. doi:10.1007/s11517-014-1180-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeny AK, Tadarati M, Freund DE, Bressler NM, Burlina P. Automated segmentation of geographic atrophy of the retinal epithelium via random forests in AREDS color fundus images. Comput Biol Med. 2015;65:124–136. doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2015.06.018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraccaro P, Nicolo M, Bonetto M, et al. Combining macula clinical signs and patient characteristics for age-related macular degeneration diagnosis: a machine learning approach. BMC Ophthalmol. 2015;15(1):10. doi:10.1186/1471-2415-15-10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maeda N, Klyce SD, Smolek MK. Neural network classification of corneal topography. Preliminary demonstration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:1327–1335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smolek MK, Klyce SD. Current keratoconus detection methods compared with a neural network approach. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:2290–2299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twa MD, Parthasarathy S, Roberts C, Mahmoud AM, Raasch TW, Bullimore MA. Automated decision tree classification of corneal shape. Optom Vis Sci. 2005;82:1038–1046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsolo K, Twa M, Bullimore MA, Parthasarathy S. Spatial modeling and classification of corneal shape. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2007;11(2):203–212. doi:10.1109/TITB.2006.879591.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saad A, Guilbert E, Gatinel D. Corneal enantiomorphism in normal and keratoconic eyes. J Refract Surg. 2014;30(8):542–547. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20140711-07.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza MB, Medeiros FW, Souza DB, Garcia R, Alves MR. Evaluation of machine learning classifiers in keratoconus detection from orbscan II examinations. Clinics. 2010;65(12):1223–1228. doi:10.1590/S1807-59322010001200002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbelaez MC, Versaci F, Vestri G, Barboni P, Savini G. Use of a support vector machine for keratoconus and subclinical keratoconus detection by topographic and tomographic data. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(11):2231–2238. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.06.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smadja D, Touboul D, Cohen A, et al. Detection of subclinical keratoconus using an automated decision tree classification. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;156(2):237,246. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2013.03.034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheboli D, Ravindran B Detection of keratoconus by semi-supervised learning. Work-shop on Machine Learning for Health-Care Applications, Helsinki, Finland; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Valdés-Mas MA, Martín-Guerrero JD, Rupérez MJ, et al. A new approach based on machine learning for predicting corneal curvature (K1) and astigmatism in patients with keratoconus after intracorneal ring implantation. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;116(1):39–47. doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2014.04.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovács I, Miháltz K, Kránitz K, et al. Accuracy of machine learning classifiers using bilateral data from a Scheimpflug camera for identifying eyes with preclinical signs of keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(2):275–283.doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.09.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidalgo IR, Rodriguez P, Rozema JJ, et al. Evaluation of a machine-learning classifier for keratoconus detection based on Scheimpflug tomography. Cornea. 2016;35(6):827–832. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000000834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Issarti I, Rozema J, Consejo A. Corneal modeling and keratoconus identification. Biomath Commun Suppl. 2018;5:1.
   Google Scholar
• Libralao GL, de Almedia O, Netto AV, Delbem A, Leon A, de Carvalho F Machine learning techniques for ocular errors analysis. Machine learning for signal processing, 2004. Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Signal Processing Society Workshop; IEEE, Sao Luis, Brazil; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Libralao G, Almeida O, Carvalho A. Classification of ophthalmologic images using an ensemble of classifiers. Innov Appl Artif Intell. 2005;6–13. doi:10.1007/11504894_5.
   Google Scholar
• Ohlendorf A, Leube A, Leibig C, Wahl S. A machine learning approach to determine refractive errors of the eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58:1136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Hasegawa A, Itoh K, Ichioka Y. Image processing of human corneal endothelium based on a learning network. Appl Opt. 1991;30(29):4211–4217. doi:10.1364/AO.30.004211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasegawa A, Itoh K, Ichioka Y. Generalization of shift invariant neural networks: image processing of corneal endothelium. Neural Networks. 1996;9(2):345–356. doi:10.1016/0893-6080(95)00054-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharif MS, Qahwaji R, Ipson S, Brahma A. Medical image classification based on artificial intelligence approaches: a practical study on normal and abnormal confocal corneal images. Appl Soft Comput. 2015;36:269–282. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.07.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman RH, Urs R, RoyChoudhury A, Archer TJ, Gobbe M, Reinstein DZ. Epithelial remodeling as basis for machine-based identification of keratoconus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(3):1580–1587. doi:10.1167/iovs.13-12578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koh YW, Celik T, Lee HK, Petznick A, Tong L. Detection of meibomian glands and classification of meibography images. J Biomed Opt. 2012;17(8):0860081. doi:10.1117/1.JBO.17.8.086008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remeseiro B, Penas M, Mosquera A, Novo J, Penedo M, Yebra-Pimentel E. Statistical comparison of classifiers applied to the interferential tear film lipid layer automatic classification. Comput Math Methods Med. 2012;2012:1–10. doi:10.1155/2012/207315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos L, Penas M, Remeseiro B, Mosquera A, Barreira N, Yebra-Pimentel E. Texture and color analysis for the automatic classification of the eye lipid layer. Adv Comput Intell. 2011;66–73. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21498-1_9.
   Google Scholar
• Chylack LT, Wolfe JK, Singer DM, et al. The lens opacities classification system III. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111(6):831–836. doi:10.1001/archopht.1993.01090060119035.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cheung CY, Li H, Lamoureux EL, et al. Validity of a new computer-aided diagnosis imaging program to quantify nuclear cataract from slit-lamp photographs. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(3):1314–1319. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-5427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu Y, Gao X, Lin S, et al. Automatic grading of nuclear cataracts from slit-lamp lens images using group sparsity regression. International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention; Springer, Nagoya, Japan; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Bagheri A, Adorno DP, Rizzo P, Barraco R, Bellomonte L. Empirical mode decomposition and neural network for the classification of electroretinographic data. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2014;52(7):619–628. doi:10.1007/s11517-014-1164-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia-Martin E, Herrero R, Bambo MP, et al. Artificial neural network techniques to improve the ability of optical coherence tomography to detect optic neuritis. Semin Ophthalmol. 2015;30(1):11–19. doi:10.3109/08820538.2013.810277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harangi B, Csordás T, Hajdu A Detecting the excessive activation of the ciliaris muscle on thermal images. IEEE 9th International Symposium on Applied Machine Intelligence and Informatics (SAMI), Smolenice, Slovakia; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Rello L, Ballesteros M Detecting readers with dyslexia using machine learning with eye tracking measures. Proceedings of the 12th Web for All Conference; ACM, Florence, Italy; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Proença H, Filipe S, Santos R, Oliveira J, Alexandre LA. The ubiris. v2: a database of visible wavelength iris images captured on-the-move and at-a-distance. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2010;32(8):1529–1535. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.2009.66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proenca H. Iris recognition: on the segmentation of degraded images acquired in the visible wavelength. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2010;32(8):1502–1516. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.2009.140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witten IH, Frank E, Hall MA, Pal CJ. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems, Morgan Kaufmann publishers, USA; 2016
   Google Scholar
• Consejo A, Bartuzel MM, Iskander DR. Corneo-scleral limbal changes following short-term soft contact lens wear. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2017;40(5):293–300. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2017.04.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consejo A, Behaegel J, Van Hoey M, Wolffsohn JS, Rozema JJ, Iskander DR. Anterior eye surface changes following miniscleral contact lens wear. Contact Lens Anterior Eye. inpress. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2018.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall M, Frank E, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Reutemann P, Witten IH. The WEKA data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsl. 2009;11(1):10–18. doi:10.1145/1656274.1656278.
   Google Scholar
• Segaran T. Programming Collective Intelligence: Building Smart Web 2.0 Applications. O’Reilly Media, USA; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Dutton DM, Conroy GV. A review of machine learning. Knowl Eng Rev. 1997;12(4):341–367. doi:10.1017/S026988899700101X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction. Springer, USA; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop CM. Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford university press, UK; 1995
   Google Scholar
• Murthy SK. Automatic construction of decision trees from data: a multi-disciplinary survey. Data Min Knowl Discov. 1998;2(4):345–389. doi:10.1023/A:1009744630224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fürnkranz J. Separate-and-conquer rule learning. Artif Intell Rev. 1999;13(1):3–54. doi:10.1023/A:1006524209794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wettschereck D, Aha DW, Mohri T. A review and empirical evaluation of feature weighting methods for a class of lazy learning algorithms. Artif Intell Rev. 1997;11(1/5):273–314. doi:10.1023/A:1006593614256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J. An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-Based Learning Methods. Cambridge University Press New York, USA; 1999
   Google Scholar