Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31170223›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Reproduction study using public data of: Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs.

Mike Voets, Kajsa Møllersen, Lars Ailo Bongo

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Macular edema in retinal fundus images by a computational algorithmRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mike VoetsDepartment of Computer Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9582-8799
Kajsa MøllersenDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-0619-7276
Lars Ailo BongoDepartment of Computer Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7544-2482

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We have attempted to reproduce the results in Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs, published in JAMA 2016; 316(22), using publicly available data sets. We re-implemented the main method in the original study since the source code is not available. The original study used non-public fundus images from EyePACS and three hospitals in India for training. We used a different EyePACS data set from Kaggle. The original study used the benchmark data set Messidor-2 to evaluate the algorithm's performance. We used another distribution of the Messidor-2 data set, since the original data set is no longer available. In the original study, ophthalmologists re-graded all images for diabetic retinopathy, macular edema, and image gradability. We have one diabetic retinopathy grade per image for our data sets, and we assessed image gradability ourselves. We were not able to reproduce the original study's results with publicly available data. Our algorithm's area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.951 (95% CI, 0.947-0.956) on the Kaggle EyePACS test set and 0.853 (95% CI, 0.835-0.871) on Messidor-2 did not come close to the reported AUC of 0.99 on both test sets in the original study. This may be caused by the use of a single grade per image, or different data. This study shows the challenges of reproducing deep learning method results, and the need for more replication and reproduction studies to validate deep learning methods, especially for medical image analysis. Our source code and instructions are available at: https://github.com/mikevoets/jama16-retina-replication.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDeep LearningFluorescein AngiographyFundus OculiImage Processing, Computer-AssistedDiabetic RetinopathyFemaleHumansIndiaMale

Identifiers

PMID31170223
PMCPMC6553744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.