Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34003990›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021

Strategies to Improve Convolutional Neural Network Generalizability and Reference Standards for Glaucoma Detection From OCT Scans.

Kaveri A Thakoor, Xinhui Li, Emmanouil Tsamis, Zane Z Zemborain, Carlos Gustavo De Moraes, Paul Sajda, Donald C Hood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Generative adversarial network-based deep learning approach in classification of retinal conditions with optical coherence tomography images.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

7 authors.

Kaveri A ThakoorDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Xinhui LiDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Emmanouil TsamisDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Zane Z ZemborainDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Carlos Gustavo De MoraesDepartment of Ophthalmology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Paul SajdaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Donald C HoodDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Tests of Models of Retinal/Optic Nerve Diseases&AdaptionR01EY002115 · NEI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI HOOD, DONALD C. · 1985 to 2018
$7.4M
Structural and Functional Progression of Glaucomatous Damage to the MaculaR01EY025253 · NEI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI DE MORAES, CARLOS GUSTAVO · 2015 to 2017
$1.2M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY002115NEI NIH HHS R01 EY025253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To develop and evaluate methods to improve the generalizability of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) trained to detect glaucoma from optical coherence tomography retinal nerve fiber layer probability maps, as well as optical coherence tomography circumpapillary disc (circle) b-scans, and to explore impact of reference standard (RS) on CNN accuracy. Methods: CNNs previously optimized for glaucoma detection from retinal nerve fiber layer probability maps, and newly developed CNNs adapted for glaucoma detection from optical coherence tomography b-scans, were evaluated on an unseen dataset (i.e., data collected at a different site). Multiple techniques were used to enhance CNN generalizability, including augmenting the training dataset, using multimodal input, and training with confidently rated images. Model performance was evaluated with different RS. Results: Training with data augmentation and training on confident images enhanced the accuracy of the CNNs for glaucoma detection on a new dataset by 5% to 9%. CNN performance was optimal when a similar RS was used to establish labels both for the training and the testing sets. However, interestingly, the CNNs described here were robust to variation in the RS. Conclusions: CNN generalizability can be improved with data augmentation, multiple input image modalities, and training on images with confident ratings. CNNs trained and tested with the same RS achieved best accuracy, suggesting that choosing a thorough and consistent RS for training and testing improves generalization to new datasets. Translational Relevance: Strategies for enhancing CNN generalizability and for choosing optimal RS should be standard practice for CNNs before their deployment for glaucoma detection.

Indexed as

Deep LearningGlaucomaHumansNeural Networks, ComputerReference StandardsTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID34003990
PMCPMC8054628

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.