Discriminative power of visual attributes in dermatology

Skin Research and Technology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Giotis, Ioannis ^a   Visser, Margaretha ^b   Jonkman, Marcel ^b   Petkov, Nicolai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Dermatological lexicon; Discriminative power; Entropy; Information theory; Skin lesion

Indexed keywords

ADDED VALUES; BROWN COLOR; COMPUTER AIDED DIAGNOSTICS; DERMATOLOGICAL LEXICON; DIAGNOSTIC PROCESS; DISCRIMINATIVE POWER; INFORMATIVE ATTRIBUTES; MINIMUM VALUE; NAIVE BAYESIAN CLASSIFIER; PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE; SKIN DISEASE; SKIN LESION; THEORETICAL APPROACH; VISUAL ATTRIBUTES;

DERMATOLOGY; ENTROPY; INFORMATION THEORY; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS;

DIAGNOSIS;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BOOK; CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION; DERMATOLOGY; ECZEMA; ENTROPY; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MYCOSIS; PROBABILITY; PSORIASIS; SKIN COLOR; SKIN DISEASE; SKIN SURFACE; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; THEORETICAL STUDY; VERRUCOUS CARCINOMA; VISION; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION;

BAYES THEOREM; COLOR; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DERMATOLOGY; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; ENTROPY; HUMANS; INFORMATION THEORY; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SKIN; SKIN DISEASES;

EID: 84872125812     PISSN: 0909752X     EISSN: 16000846     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2012.00618.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Brooks GJ, Ashton RE, Pethybridge RJ. DERMIS: a computer system for assisting primary-care physicians with dermatological diagnosis. British J Dermatol 1992; 12: 614-619.
2. Smith HR. Initial use of a computer system for assisting dermatological diagnosis in general practice. Med Inform Internet Med 2000; 25: 103-108.
3. Burroni M, Sbano P, Cevenini G, Risulo M, Dell'eva G, Barbini P, Miracco C, Fimiani M, Andreassi L, Rubegni P. Dysplastic naevus vs. in situ melanoma: digital dermoscopy analysis. Br J Dermatol 2005; 152: 679-684.
4. Johnke H, Vach W, Norberg LA, Bindslev-Jensen C, Host A, Andersen KE. A comparison between criteria for diagnosing atopic eczema in infants. British J Dermatol 2005; 153: 352-358.
5. Maglogiannis I, Doukas CN. Overview of advanced computer vision systems for skin lesions characterization. Inf Technol Biomed IEEE Trans 2009; 13: 721-733.
6. Furey TS, Cristianini N, Duffy N, Bednarski DW, Schummer M, Haussler, D. Support vector machines classification and validation of cancer tissue samples using microarray expression data. Bioinformatics 2000; 16: 906-914.
7. Miyahara K, Pazzani MJ. Collaborative filtering with the simple Bayesian classifier. In: Mizoguchi R and Slaney J, eds. Proceedings of the 6th Pacific Rim international conference on artificial intelligence. PRICAI'00, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2000: 679-689.
8. Torkkola, K. Feature extraction by non parametric mutual information maximization. J Mach Learn Res 2003; 3: 1415-1438.
9. Fleuret, F. Fast binary feature selection with conditional mutual information. J Mach Learn Res 2004; 5: 1531-1555.
10. François D, Rossi F, Wertz V, Verleysen M. Resampling methods for parameter-free and robust feature selection with mutual information. Neurocomput 2007; 70: 1276-1288.
11. Battiti, R. Using mutual information for selecting features in supervised neural net learning. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 1994; 5: 537-550.
12. Kwak, N, Choi, C-H. Input feature selection by mutual information based on parzen window. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2002; 24: 1667-1671.
13. Yang Y, Pedersen, JO. A comparative study on feature selection in text categorization. In: Fisher DH, ed. Proceedings of ICML-97 14th international conference on machine learning. Nashville, US, SanFrancisco, USA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 1997: 412-420.
14. Forman, G. An extensive empirical study of feature selection metrics for text classification. J Mach Learn Res 2003; 3: 1289-1305.
15. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 1948; 27: 379-423.
16. Resnik KS, Ackerman, AB. On standard definitions of individual skin lesions. Arch Dermatol 1998; 134: 636-637.
17. Lewis, EJ, Dahl MV, Lewis, CA. On standard definitions: 33 years hence. Arch Dermatol 1997; 133: 1169.
18. van Everdingen JJE. Provoke. Bijblijven 1994; 10: 5-8.
19. Jackson, R. Morphology revisited*. Int J Dermatol 1993; 32: 77-81.
20. Ashton RE. Teaching non-dermatologists to examine the skin: a review of the literature and some recommendations. British J Dermatol 1995; 132: 221-225.
21. Farrimond H, Dornan TL, Cockcroft A, Rhodes LE. Development and evaluation of an e-learning package for teaching skin examination. action research. British J Dermatol 2006; 155: 592-599.
22. Winkelmann RK. Glossary of basic dermatology lesions. The international league of dermatological societies committee on nomenclature. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 1987; 130: 1-16.
23. Wolff K, Johnson RA. Fitzpatricks color atlas and synopsis of clinical dermatology. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical, 2009. 1114pp.
24. Wolff K. Fitzpatricks dermatology in general medicine. Vol. 1. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical, 2008. 1198pp.
25. Rook AJ, Burns T. Rooks textbook of dermatology. Vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2004.
26. Braun-Falco O. Dermatology. Heidelberg: Springer, 2000. 1853pp.
27. Weller RPJB. Clinical dermatology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008. 426pp.
28. Gawkrodger DJ. Dermatology: an illustrated colour text. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 2002. 131pp.
29. Bhawan J. The evolution of dermatopathology - the American experience. Am J Dermatopathol 2006; 28: 67-71.
30. Zhang, H. The optimality of Naive bayes. In: Valerie B, Zdravko M, eds. FLAIRS conference. Miami Beach, FL: AAAI Press, 2004: 562-567.
31. Oztas MO, Calikoglu E, Baz K, Birol A, Onder M, Calikoglu T, Kitapci MT. Reliability of web-based teledermatology consultations. J Telemed Telecare 2004; 10; 25-28.
32. Whited JD, Hall RP, Simel DL, Foy ME, Stechuchak KM, Drugge RJ Grichnik JM, Myers SA, Horner RD. Reliability and accuracy of dermatologists' clinic-based and digital image consultations. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol 1999; 41: 693-702.