Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 9;23(2):757.
doi: 10.3390/s23020757.

Feature Ranking by Variational Dropout for Classification Using Thermograms from Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Affiliations

Feature Ranking by Variational Dropout for Classification Using Thermograms from Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Abian Hernandez-Guedes et al. Sensors (Basel). .

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus presents a high prevalence around the world. A common and long-term derived complication is diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), which have a global prevalence of roughly 6.3%, and a lifetime incidence of up to 34%. Infrared thermograms, covering the entire plantar aspect of both feet, can be employed to monitor the risk of developing a foot ulcer, because diabetic patients exhibit an abnormal pattern that may indicate a foot disorder. In this study, the publicly available INAOE dataset composed of thermogram images of healthy and diabetic subjects was employed to extract relevant features aiming to establish a set of state-of-the-art features that efficiently classify DFU. This database was extended and balanced by fusing it with private local thermograms from healthy volunteers and generating synthetic data via synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE). State-of-the-art features were extracted using two classical approaches, LASSO and random forest, as well as two variational deep learning (DL)-based ones: concrete and variational dropout. Then, the most relevant features were detected and ranked. Subsequently, the extracted features were employed to classify subjects at risk of developing an ulcer using as reference a support vector machine (SVM) classifier with a fixed hyperparameter configuration to evaluate the robustness of the selected features. The new set of features extracted considerably differed from those currently considered state-of-the-art but provided a fair performance. Among the implemented extraction approaches, the variational DL ones, particularly the concrete dropout, performed the best, reporting an F1 score of 90% using the aforementioned SVM classifier. In comparison with features previously considered as the state-of-the-art, approximately 15% better performance was achieved for classification.

Keywords: deep learning; diabetic foot; feature extraction; infrared; thermography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Dropout as a feature selection method. The variational parameter ϕd, where d[1..D], controls the probability of the input feature xd to be dropped out, that is, an estimate of the noise level of xd. The variational parameters are used for feature ranking.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Graphical illustration of the defined angiosomes. The main reference points considered and the proportional foot division are also specified [41,47]. Reference point A was located at the tip of the innermost toe, whereas B at the center of the calcaneal base. Points C and D corresponded to the wider part of the foot. Point E corresponded to the 60% height of the foot.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Deep learning architecture used for the feature selection based on variational dropout approaches. The first layer corresponds to variational dropout as a feature selector, illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The sparse rate obtained in the variational feature selector using τ>0.9 as threshold in the different cross-validation iterations.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sun H., Saeedi P., Karuranga S., Pinkepank M., Ogurtsova K., Duncan B.B., Stein C., Basit A., Chan J.C., Mbanya J.C., et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 2022;183:109119. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109119. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jaiswal V., Negi A., Pal T. A review on current advances in machine learning based diabetes prediction. Prim. Care Diabetes. 2021;15:435–443. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2021.02.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adam M., Ng E.Y., Tan J.H., Heng M.L., Tong J.W., Acharya U.R. Computer aided diagnosis of diabetic foot using infrared thermography: A review. Comput. Biol. Med. 2017;91:326–336. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.10.030. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zhang P., Lu J., Jing Y., Tang S., Zhu D., Bi Y. Global epidemiology of diabetic foot ulceration: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Med. 2017;49:106–116. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1231932. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Armstrong D.G., Boulton A.J., Bus S.A. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. New Engl. J. Med. 2017;376:2367–2375. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1615439. - DOI - PubMed