Quantifying cross-scale patch contributions to spatial connectivity

Context: Connectivity between habitat patches is vital for ecological processes at multiple scales. Traditional metrics do not measure the scales at which individual habitat patches contribute to the overall ecological connectivity of the landscape. Connectivity has previously been evaluated at several different scales based on the dispersal capabilities of particular organisms, but these approaches are data-heavy and conditioned on just a few species. Objectives: Our objective was to improve cross-scale measurement of connectivity by developing and testing a new landscape metric, cross-scale centrality. Methods: Cross-scale centrality (CSC) integrates over measurements of patch centrality at different scales (hypothetical dispersal distances) to quantify the cross-scale contribution of each individual habitat patch to overall landscape or seascape connectivity. We tested CSC against an independent metapopulation simulation model and demonstrated its potential application in conservation planning by comparison to an alternative approach that used individual dispersal data. Results: CSC correlated significantly with total patch occupancy across the entire landscape in our metapopulation simulation, while being much faster and easier to calculate. Standard conservation planning software (Marxan) using dispersal data was weaker than CSC at capturing locations with high cross-scale connectivity. Conclusions: Metrics that measure pattern across multiple scales are much faster and more efficient than full simulation models and more rigorous and interpretable than ad hoc incorporation of connectivity into conservation plans. In reality, connectivity matters for many different organisms across many different scales. Metrics like CSC that quantify landscape pattern across multiple different scales can make a valuable contribution to multi-scale landscape measurement, planning, and management

The effects of racism, social exclusion, and discrimination on achieving universal safe water and sanitation in high-income countries

Drinking water and sanitation services in high-income countries typically bring widespread health and other benefits to their populations. Yet gaps in this essential public health infrastructure persist, driven by structural inequalities, racism, poverty, housing instability, migration, climate change, insufficient continued investment, and poor planning. Although the burden of disease attributable to these gaps is mostly uncharacterised in high-income settings, case studies from marginalised communities and data from targeted studies of microbial and chemical contaminants underscore the need for continued investment to realise the human rights to water and sanitation. Delivering on these rights requires: applying a systems approach to the problems; accessible, disaggregated data; new approaches to service provision that centre communities and groups without consistent access; and actionable policies that recognise safe water and sanitation provision as an obligation of government, regardless of factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, ability to pay, citizenship status, disability, land tenure, or property rights

The effects of racism, social exclusion, and discrimination on achieving universal safe water and sanitation in high-income countries

Drinking water and sanitation services in high-income countries typically bring widespread health and other benefits to their populations. Yet gaps in this essential public health infrastructure persist, driven by structural inequalities, racism, poverty, housing instability, migration, climate change, insufficient continued investment, and poor planning. Although the burden of disease attributable to these gaps is mostly uncharacterised in high-income settings, case studies from marginalised communities and data from targeted studies of microbial and chemical contaminants underscore the need for continued investment to realise the human rights to water and sanitation. Delivering on these rights requires: applying a systems approach to the problems; accessible, disaggregated data; new approaches to service provision that centre communities and groups without consistent access; and actionable policies that recognise safe water and sanitation provision as an obligation of government, regardless of factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, ability to pay, citizenship status, disability, land tenure, or property rights

Plus Disease in Retinopathy of Prematurity: Diagnostic Trends in 2016 Versus 2007

To identify any temporal trends in the diagnosis of plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) by experts. Reliability analysis. ROP experts were recruited in 2007 and 2016 to classify 34 wide-field fundus images of ROP as plus, pre-plus, or normal, coded as “3,” “2,” and “1,” respectively, in the database. The main outcome was the average calculated score for each image in each cohort. Secondary outcomes included correlation on the relative ordering of the images in 2016 vs 2007, interexpert agreement, and intraexpert agreement. The average score for each image was higher for 30 of 34 (88%) images in 2016 compared with 2007, influenced by fewer images classified as normal (P < .01), a similar number of pre-plus (P = .52), and more classified as plus (P < .01). The mean weighted kappa values in 2006 were 0.36 (range 0.21–0.60), compared with 0.22 (range 0–0.40) in 2016. There was good correlation between rankings of disease severity between the 2 cohorts (Spearman rank correlation ρ = 0.94), indicating near-perfect agreement on relative disease severity. Despite good agreement between cohorts on relative disease severity ranking, the higher average score and classifications for each image demonstrate that experts are diagnosing pre-plus and plus disease at earlier stages of disease severity in 2016, compared with 2007. This has implications for patient care, research, and teaching, and additional studies are needed to better understand this temporal trend in image-based plus disease diagnosis

Evaluation of a Deep Learning–Derived Quantitative Retinopathy of Prematurity Severity Scale

To evaluate the clinical usefulness of a quantitative deep learning-derived vascular severity score for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) by assessing its correlation with clinical ROP diagnosis and by measuring clinician agreement in applying a novel scale. Analysis of existing database of posterior pole fundus images and corresponding ophthalmoscopic examinations using 2 methods of assigning a quantitative scale to vascular severity. Images were from clinical examinations of patients in the Imaging and Informatics in ROP Consortium. Four ophthalmologists and 1 study coordinator evaluated vascular severity on a scale from 1 to 9. A quantitative vascular severity score (1–9) was applied to each image using a deep learning algorithm. A database of 499 images was developed for assessment of interobserver agreement. Distribution of deep learning-derived vascular severity scores with the clinical assessment of zone (I, II, or III), stage (0, 1, 2, or 3), and extent (6 clock hours) of stage 3 evaluated using multivariate linear regression and weighted κ values and Pearson correlation coefficients for interobserver agreement on a 1-to-9 vascular severity scale. For deep learning analysis, a total of 6344 clinical examinations were analyzed. A higher deep learning-derived vascular severity score was associated with more posterior disease, higher disease stage, and higher extent of stage 3 disease (P < 0.001 for all). For a given ROP stage, the vascular severity score was higher in zone I than zones II or III (P < 0.001). Multivariate regression found zone, stage, and extent all were associated independently with the severity score (P < 0.001 for all). For interobserver agreement, the mean ± standard deviation weighted κ value was 0.67 ± 0.06, and the Pearson correlation coefficient ± standard deviation was 0.88 ± 0.04 on the use of a 1-to-9 vascular severity scale. A vascular severity scale for ROP seems feasible for clinical adoption; corresponds with zone, stage, extent of stage 3, and plus disease; and facilitates the use of objective technology such as deep learning to improve the consistency of ROP diagnosis

Variability in Plus Disease Diagnosis using Single and Serial Images

PurposeTo assess changes in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) diagnosis in single and serial retinal images.DesignCohort study.ParticipantsCases of ROP recruited from the Imaging and Informatics in Retinopathy of Prematurity (i-ROP) consortium evaluated by 7 graders.MethodsSeven ophthalmologists reviewed both single and 3 consecutive serial retinal images from 15 cases with ROP, and severity was assigned as plus, preplus, or none. Imaging data were acquired during routine ROP screening from 2011 to 2015, and a reference standard diagnosis was established for each image. A secondary analysis was performed using the i-ROP deep learning system to assign a vascular severity score (VSS) to each image, ranging from 1 to 9, with 9 being the most severe disease. This score has been previously demonstrated to correlate with the International Classification of ROP. Mean plus disease severity was calculated by averaging 14 labels per image in serial and single images to decrease noise.Main outcome measuresGrading severity of ROP as defined by plus, preplus, or no ROP.ResultsAssessment of serial retinal images changed the grading severity for &gt; 50% of the graders, although there was wide variability. Cohen's kappa ranged from 0.29 to 1.0, which showed a wide range of agreement from slight to perfect by each grader. Changes in the grading of serial retinal images were noted more commonly in cases of preplus disease. The mean severity in cases with a diagnosis of plus disease and no disease did not change between single and serial images. The ROP VSS demonstrated good correlation with the range of expert classifications of plus disease and overall agreement with the mode class (P&nbsp;= 0.001). The VSS correlated with mean plus disease severity by expert diagnosis (correlation coefficient, 0.89). The more aggressive graders tended to be influenced by serial images to increase the severity of their grading. The VSS also demonstrated agreement with disease progression across serial images, which progressed to preplus and plus disease.ConclusionsClinicians demonstrated variability in ROP diagnosis when presented with both single and serial images. The use of deep learning as a quantitative assessment of plus disease has the potential to standardize ROP diagnosis and treatment

Federated Learning for Multicenter Collaboration in Ophthalmology

To compare the performance of deep learning classifiers for the diagnosis of plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) trained using 2 methods for developing models on multi-institutional data sets: centralizing data versus federated learning (FL) in which no data leave each institution. Evaluation of a diagnostic test or technology. Deep learning models were trained, validated, and tested on 5255 wide-angle retinal images in the neonatal intensive care units of 7 institutions as part of the Imaging and Informatics in ROP study. All images were labeled for the presence of plus, preplus, or no plus disease with a clinical label and a reference standard diagnosis (RSD) determined by 3 image-based ROP graders and the clinical diagnosis. We compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for models developed on multi-institutional data, using a central approach initially, followed by FL, and compared locally trained models with both approaches. We compared the model performance (κ) with the label agreement (between clinical and RSD), data set size, and number of plus disease cases in each training cohort using the Spearman correlation coefficient (CC). Model performance using AUROC and linearly weighted κ. Four settings of experiment were used: FL trained on RSD against central trained on RSD, FL trained on clinical labels against central trained on clinical labels, FL trained on RSD against central trained on clinical labels, and FL trained on clinical labels against central trained on RSD (P = 0.046, P = 0.126, P = 0.224, and P = 0.0173, respectively). Four of the 7 (57%) models trained on local institutional data performed inferiorly to the FL models. The model performance for local models was positively correlated with the label agreement (between clinical and RSD labels, CC = 0.389, P = 0.387), total number of plus cases (CC = 0.759, P = 0.047), and overall training set size (CC = 0.924, P = 0.002). We found that a trained FL model performs comparably to a centralized model, confirming that FL may provide an effective, more feasible solution for interinstitutional learning. Smaller institutions benefit more from collaboration than larger institutions, showing the potential of FL for addressing disparities in resource access