Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
168 result(s) for "Chambers, Ryan"
Sort by:
The Use of Wearable Microsensors to Quantify Sport-Specific Movements
Background Microtechnology has allowed sport scientists to understand the locomotor demands of various sports. While wearable global positioning technology has been used to quantify the locomotor demands of sporting activities, microsensors (i.e. accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers) embedded within the units also have the capability to detect sport-specific movements. Objective The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which microsensors (also referred to as inertial measurement units and microelectromechanical sensors) have been utilised in quantifying sport-specific movements. Methods A systematic review of the use of microsensors and associated terms to evaluate sport-specific movements was conducted; permutations of the terms used included alternate names of the various technologies used, their applications and different applied environments. Studies for this review were published between 2008 and 2014 and were identified through a systematic search of six electronic databases: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. Articles were required to have used athlete-mounted sensors to detect sport-specific movements (e.g. rugby union tackle) rather than sensors mounted to equipment and monitoring generic movement patterns. Results A total of 2395 studies were initially retrieved from the six databases and 737 results were removed as they were duplicates, review articles or conference abstracts. After screening titles and abstracts of the remaining papers, the full text of 47 papers was reviewed, resulting in the inclusion of 28 articles that met the set criteria around the application of microsensors for detecting sport-specific movements. Eight articles addressed the use of microsensors within individual sports, team sports provided seven results, water sports provided eight articles, and five articles addressed the use of microsensors in snow sports. All articles provided evidence of the ability of microsensors to detect sport-specific movements. Results demonstrated varying purposes for the use of microsensors, encompassing the detection of movement and movement frequency, the identification of movement errors and the assessment of forces during collisions. Conclusion This systematic review has highlighted the use of microsensors to detect sport-specific movements across a wide range of individual and team sports. The ability of microsensors to capture sport-specific movements emphasises the capability of this technology to provide further detail on athlete demands and performance. However, there was mixed evidence on the ability of microsensors to quantify some movements (e.g. tackling within rugby union, rugby league and Australian rules football). Given these contrasting results, further research is required to validate the ability of wearable microsensors containing accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers to detect tackles in collision sports, as well as other contact events such as the ruck, maul and scrum in rugby union.
Automatic detection of one-on-one tackles and ruck events using microtechnology in rugby union
To automate the detection of ruck and tackle events in rugby union using a specifically-designed algorithm based on microsensor data. Cross-sectional study. Elite rugby union players wore microtechnology devices (Catapult, S5) during match-play. Ruck (n=125) and tackle (n=125) event data was synchronised with video footage compiled from international rugby union match-play ruck and tackle events. A specifically-designed algorithm to detect ruck and tackle events was developed using a random forest classification model. This algorithm was then validated using 8 additional international match-play datasets and video footage, with each ruck and tackle manually coded and verified if the event was correctly identified by the algorithm. The classification algorithm’s results indicated that all rucks and tackles were correctly identified during match-play when 79.4±9.2% and 81.0±9.3% of the random forest decision trees agreed with the video-based determination of these events. Sub-group analyses of backs and forwards yielded similar optimal confidence percentages of 79.7% and 79.1% respectively for rucks. Sub-analysis revealed backs (85.3±7.2%) produced a higher algorithm cut-off for tackles than forwards (77.7±12.2%). The specifically-designed algorithm was able to detect rucks and tackles for all positions involved. For optimal results, it is recommended that practitioners use the recommended cut-off (80%) to limit false positives for match-play and training. Although this algorithm provides an improved insight into the number and type of collisions in which rugby players engage, this algorithm does not provide impact forces of these events.
Effect of ethnicity and other sociodemographic factors on attendance at diabetic eye screening: a 12-month retrospective cohort study
ObjectivesTo examine the association of sociodemographic characteristics with attendance at diabetic eye screening in a large ethnically diverse urban population.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingScreening visits in the North East London Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (NELDESP).Participants84 449 people with diabetes aged 12 years or older registered in the NELDESP and scheduled for screening between 1 April 2017 and 31 March 2018.Main outcome measureAttendance at diabetic eye screening appointments.ResultsThe mean age of people with diabetes was 60 years (SD 14.2 years), 53.4% were men, 41% South Asian, 29% White British and 17% Black; 83.4% attended screening. Black people with diabetes had similar levels of attendance compared with White British people. However, South Asian, Chinese and 'Any other Asian' background ethnicities showed greater odds of attendance compared with White British. When compared with their respective reference group, high levels of deprivation, younger age, longer duration of diabetes and worse visual acuity, were all associated with non-attendance. There was a higher likelihood of attendance per quintile improvement in deprivation (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.08), with increasing age (OR per decade, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.19), with better visual acuity (OR per Bailey-Lovie chart line 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.14) and with longer time of NELDESP registration (OR per year, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.03).ConclusionEthnic differences in diabetic eye screening uptake, though small, are evident. Despite preconceptions, a higher likelihood of screening attendance was observed among Asian ethnic groups when compared with the White ethnic group. Poorer socioeconomic profile was associated with higher likelihood of non-attendance for screening. Further work is needed to understand how to target individuals at risk of non-attendance and reduce inequalities.
What are the perceptions and concerns of people living with diabetes and National Health Service staff around the potential implementation of AI-assisted screening for diabetic eye disease? Development and validation of a survey for use in a secondary care screening setting
IntroductionThe English National Health Service (NHS) Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (DESP) performs around 2.3 million eye screening appointments annually, generating approximately 13 million retinal images that are graded by humans for the presence or severity of diabetic retinopathy. Previous research has shown that automated retinal image analysis systems, including artificial intelligence (AI), can identify images with no disease from those with diabetic retinopathy as safely and effectively as human graders, and could significantly reduce the workload for human graders. Some algorithms can also determine the level of severity of the retinopathy with similar performance to humans. There is a need to examine perceptions and concerns surrounding AI-assisted eye-screening among people living with diabetes and NHS staff, if AI was to be introduced into the DESP, to identify factors that may influence acceptance of this technology.Methods and analysisPeople living with diabetes and staff from the North East London (NEL) NHS DESP were invited to participate in two respective focus groups to codesign two online surveys exploring their perceptions and concerns around the potential introduction of AI-assisted screening.Focus group participants were representative of the local population in terms of ages and ethnicity. Participants’ feedback was taken into consideration to update surveys which were circulated for further feedback. Surveys will be piloted at the NEL DESP and followed by semistructured interviews to assess accessibility, usability and to validate the surveys.Validated surveys will be distributed by other NHS DESP sites, and also via patient groups on social media, relevant charities and the British Association of Retinal Screeners. Post-survey evaluative interviews will be undertaken among those who consent to participate in further research.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained by the NHS Research Ethics Committee (IRAS ID: 316631). Survey results will be shared and discussed with focus groups to facilitate preparation of findings for publication and to inform codesign of outreach activities to address concerns and perceptions identified.
Ethnic disparities in progression rates for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy in diabetic eye screening: a population-based retrospective cohort study
IntroductionThe English Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (DESP) offers people living with diabetes (PLD) annual eye screening. We examined incidence and determinants of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) in a sociodemographically diverse multi-ethnic population.Research design and methodsNorth East London DESP cohort data (January 2012 to December 2021) with 137 591 PLD with no retinopathy, or non-STDR at baseline in one/both eyes, were used to calculate STDR incidence rates by sociodemographic factors, diabetes type, and duration. HR from Cox models examined associations with STDR.ResultsThere were 16 388 incident STDR cases over a median of 5.4 years (IQR 2.8–8.2; STDR rate 2.214, 95% CI 2.214 to 2.215 per 100 person-years). People with no retinopathy at baseline had a lower risk of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) compared with those with non-STDR in one eye (HR 3.03, 95% CI 2.91 to 3.15, p<0.001) and both eyes (HR 7.88, 95% CI 7.59 to 8.18, p<0.001). Black and South Asian individuals had higher STDR hazards than white individuals (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.64 and HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.42, respectively). Additionally, every 5-year increase in age at inclusion was associated with an 8% reduction in STDR hazards (p<0.001).ConclusionsEthnic disparities exist in a health system limited by capacity rather than patient economic circumstances. Diabetic retinopathy at first screen is a strong determinant of STDR development. By using basic demographic characteristics, screening programmes or clinical practices can stratify risk for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy development.
A Phylogenetic Assessment of Pocket Gophers (Geomys): Evidence from Nuclear and Mitochondrial Genes
Phylogenetic relationships within Geomys historically have been difficult to assess using morphometric and chromosomal data. DNA sequences from the nuclear-encoded interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding protein gene (Rbp3) and mitochondrial 12S ribosomal RNA (12S rRNA) gene were used to examine the relationships within Geomys. In addition, sequence data from Rbp3 and mitochondrial 12S rRNA gene regions were combined with DNA sequence data from the mitochondrial cytochrome-b gene (Cytb) reported in a previous study. Results from phylogenetic analyses support previously established relationships in the recognition of 4 species groups (breviceps, bursarius, personatus, and pinetis) and a minimum of 12 species. Additionally, results agree with previous studies in considering the elevation of G. pinetis mobilensis and G. breviceps sagittalis to species-level status and in reevaluating the taxonomic status of 2 additional subspecies (G. personatus davisi and G. p. maritimus).
Prospective evaluation of an artificial intelligence-enabled algorithm for automated diabetic retinopathy screening of 30 000 patients
Background/aimsHuman grading of digital images from diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening programmes represents a significant challenge, due to the increasing prevalence of diabetes. We evaluate the performance of an automated artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to triage retinal images from the English Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (DESP) into test-positive/technical failure versus test-negative, using human grading following a standard national protocol as the reference standard.MethodsRetinal images from 30 405 consecutive screening episodes from three English DESPs were manually graded following a standard national protocol and by an automated process with machine learning enabled software, EyeArt v2.1. Screening performance (sensitivity, specificity) and diagnostic accuracy (95% CIs) were determined using human grades as the reference standard.ResultsSensitivity (95% CIs) of EyeArt was 95.7% (94.8% to 96.5%) for referable retinopathy (human graded ungradable, referable maculopathy, moderate-to-severe non-proliferative or proliferative). This comprises sensitivities of 98.3% (97.3% to 98.9%) for mild-to-moderate non-proliferative retinopathy with referable maculopathy, 100% (98.7%,100%) for moderate-to-severe non-proliferative retinopathy and 100% (97.9%,100%) for proliferative disease. EyeArt agreed with the human grade of no retinopathy (specificity) in 68% (67% to 69%), with a specificity of 54.0% (53.4% to 54.5%) when combined with non-referable retinopathy.ConclusionThe algorithm demonstrated safe levels of sensitivity for high-risk retinopathy in a real-world screening service, with specificity that could halve the workload for human graders. AI machine learning and deep learning algorithms such as this can provide clinically equivalent, rapid detection of retinopathy, particularly in settings where a trained workforce is unavailable or where large-scale and rapid results are needed.
Diagnostic accuracy of diabetic retinopathy grading by an artificial intelligence-enabled algorithm compared with a human standard for wide-field true-colour confocal scanning and standard digital retinal images
BackgroundPhotographic diabetic retinopathy screening requires labour-intensive grading of retinal images by humans. Automated retinal image analysis software (ARIAS) could provide an alternative to human grading. We compare the performance of an ARIAS using true-colour, wide-field confocal scanning images and standard fundus images in the English National Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (NDESP) against human grading.MethodsCross-sectional study with consecutive recruitment of patients attending annual diabetic eye screening. Imaging with mydriasis was performed (two-field protocol) with the EIDON platform (CenterVue, Padua, Italy) and standard NDESP cameras. Human grading was carried out according to NDESP protocol. Images were processed by EyeArt V.2.1.0 (Eyenuk Inc, Woodland Hills, California). The reference standard for analysis was the human grade of standard NDESP images.ResultsWe included 1257 patients. Sensitivity estimates for retinopathy grades were: EIDON images; 92.27% (95% CI: 88.43% to 94.69%) for any retinopathy, 99% (95% CI: 95.35% to 100%) for vision-threatening retinopathy and 100% (95% CI: 61% to 100%) for proliferative retinopathy. For NDESP images: 92.26% (95% CI: 88.37% to 94.69%) for any retinopathy, 100% (95% CI: 99.53% to 100%) for vision-threatening retinopathy and 100% (95% CI: 61% to 100%) for proliferative retinopathy. One case of vision-threatening retinopathy (R1M1) was missed by the EyeArt when analysing the EIDON images, but identified by the human graders. The EyeArt identified all cases of vision-threatening retinopathy in the standard images.ConclusionEyeArt identified diabetic retinopathy in EIDON images with similar sensitivity to standard images in a large-scale screening programme, exceeding the sensitivity threshold recommended for a screening test. Further work to optimise the identification of ‘no retinopathy’ and to understand the differential lesion detection in the two imaging systems would enhance the use of these two innovative technologies in a diabetic retinopathy screening setting.
How is the risk of being diagnosed with referable diabetic retinopathy affected by failure to attend diabetes eye screening appointments?
Background/AimsThis study examines the anecdotal impression that in diabetes eye screening there is a relationship between number of consecutive missed screening appointments and the incidence of referable retinopathy at the next screening appointment that is attended.MethodsA retrospective observational audit was conducted of data from 62,067 people who were due for annual diabetes eye screening in the North East London Diabetes Eye Screening Programme between January 2010 and January 2017, and who had missed at least one screening appointment within that time.ResultsMissing 5 consecutive screening appointments increased the incidence of referable retinopathy from a programme average of 4% up to 15%. The incidence of referable retinopathy in people missing 10 or more consecutive appointments was ~20%. There was an association between younger age, male gender, type I disease, and being of African ethnicity with increasing number of missed appointments.ConclusionsThere was a strong association between the number of missed appointments and the proportion of patients showing referable retinopathy at the next visit. Approaches to reduce the number of missed appointments may help to reduce the incidence of referable retinopathy. These may be targeted at those showing the greatest non-attendance behaviour in the current study.