World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

Classification of Retinal Vascular Diseases Using Ensemble Decision Tree in Thermal Images

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218001423570100Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)

    In the field of medicine, thermal image processing and analysis play a significant role in the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of diseases. For example, during the last decade, several studies have been performed based on thermal image processing for ocular disease diagnosis. This research proposes a unique approach for the classification of subgroups of two retinal vascular diseases, namely diabetic eye disease and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The class imbalance problem is a well-known issue when working with medical data, where one class is significantly less represented than another class in the dataset. To deal with the class imbalance issue, an ensemble decision tree classifier with a random under-sampling and adaptive boosting (RUSBoost) technique is proposed. The performance of the proposed classifier is compared with various traditional machine learning-based classifiers. Experimental results show that the proposed ensemble tree outperforms other classifiers through high accuracy, FF-score, and Mathews correlation coefficient (MCC) values in classifying diabetic eye diseases and AMD diseases. The proposed ensemble decision tree distinguishes dry AMD and wet AMD over healthy controls with 95% average accuracy. Also, it classifies diabetic retinopathy (DR) with diabetic macular edema (DME) and DR without DME with 94% average accuracy. The classifier could distinguish dry and wet AMD which did not work around in temperature analysis on the manual temperature measurement. The performance of the automated classification model is on par with the performance of the temperature analysis of OST for DME and DR without DME.