Opportunities and challenges of supervised machine learning for the classification of motor evoked potentials according to muscles
Version
Published
Date Issued
2023
Author(s)
Wermelinger, Jonathan
Parduzi, Qendresa
Raabe, Andreas
Schneider, Ulf C.
Seidel, Kathleen
Type
Article
Language
English
Abstract
Background
Even for an experienced neurophysiologist, it is challenging to look at a single graph of an unlabeled motor evoked potential (MEP) and identify the corresponding muscle. We demonstrate that supervised machine learning (ML) can successfully perform this task.
Methods
Intraoperative MEP data from supratentorial surgery on 36 patients was included for the classification task with 4 muscles: Extensor digitorum (EXT), abductor pollicis brevis (APB), tibialis anterior (TA) and abductor hallucis (AH). Three different supervised ML classifiers (random forest (RF), k-nearest neighbors (kNN) and logistic regression (LogReg)) were trained and tested on either raw or compressed data. Patient data was classified considering either all 4 muscles simultaneously, 2 muscles within the same extremity (EXT versus APB), or 2 muscles from different extremities (EXT versus TA).
Results
In all cases, RF classifiers performed best and kNN second best. The highest performances were achieved on raw data (4 muscles 83%, EXT versus APB 89%, EXT versus TA 97% accuracy).
Conclusions
Standard ML methods show surprisingly high performance on a classification task with intraoperative MEP signals. This study illustrates the power and challenges of standard ML algorithms when handling intraoperative signals and may lead to intraoperative safety improvements.
Even for an experienced neurophysiologist, it is challenging to look at a single graph of an unlabeled motor evoked potential (MEP) and identify the corresponding muscle. We demonstrate that supervised machine learning (ML) can successfully perform this task.
Methods
Intraoperative MEP data from supratentorial surgery on 36 patients was included for the classification task with 4 muscles: Extensor digitorum (EXT), abductor pollicis brevis (APB), tibialis anterior (TA) and abductor hallucis (AH). Three different supervised ML classifiers (random forest (RF), k-nearest neighbors (kNN) and logistic regression (LogReg)) were trained and tested on either raw or compressed data. Patient data was classified considering either all 4 muscles simultaneously, 2 muscles within the same extremity (EXT versus APB), or 2 muscles from different extremities (EXT versus TA).
Results
In all cases, RF classifiers performed best and kNN second best. The highest performances were achieved on raw data (4 muscles 83%, EXT versus APB 89%, EXT versus TA 97% accuracy).
Conclusions
Standard ML methods show surprisingly high performance on a classification task with intraoperative MEP signals. This study illustrates the power and challenges of standard ML algorithms when handling intraoperative signals and may lead to intraoperative safety improvements.
Subjects
QA Mathematics
QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Publisher DOI
Journal or Serie
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
ISSN
1472-6947
Volume
23
Issue
1
Publisher
BioMed Central
Submitter
Sariyar, Murat
Citation apa
Wermelinger, J., Parduzi, Q., Sariyar, M., Raabe, A., Schneider, U. C., & Seidel, K. (2023). Opportunities and challenges of supervised machine learning for the classification of motor evoked potentials according to muscles. In BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (Vol. 23, Issue 1). BioMed Central. https://doi.org/10.24451/arbor.20860
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
open access
Name
s12911-023-02276-3.pdf
License
Attribution 4.0 International
Version
published
Size
5.89 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
42b0d30ec355faa3a64bcdfa7d707d8b
