Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34749634›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021

General deep learning model for detecting diabetic retinopathy.

Ping-Nan Chen, Chia-Chiang Lee, Chang-Min Liang, Shu-I Pao, Ke-Hao Huang, Ke-Feng Lin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Interpretable Machine Learning Models for Predicting Malignant Ventricular Arrhythmia in Patients with Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Based on Systemic Inflammation Index.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ping-Nan ChenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, 114, Taiwan, ROC. g931310@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6240-4340
Chia-Chiang LeeGraduate Institute of Applied Science and Technology, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, 106, Taiwan, ROC.
Chang-Min LiangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, 114, Taiwan, ROC.
Shu-I PaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, 114, Taiwan, ROC.
Ke-Hao HuangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, 114, Taiwan, ROC.
Ke-Feng LinGraduate Institute of Applied Science and Technology, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, 106, Taiwan, ROC.
Tri-Service General Hospital · TWNational Defense Medical Center · TWNational Taiwan University of Science and Technology · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDoctors can detect symptoms of diabetic retinopathy (DR) early by using retinal ophthalmoscopy, and they can improve diagnostic efficiency with the assistance of deep learning to select treatments and support personnel workflow. Conventionally, most deep learning methods for DR diagnosis categorize retinal ophthalmoscopy images into training and validation data sets according to the 80/20 rule, and they use the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) in data processing (e.g., rotating, scaling, and translating training images) to increase the number of training samples. Oversampling training may lead to overfitting of the training model. Therefore, untrained or unverified images can yield erroneous predictions. Although the accuracy of prediction results is 90%-99%, this overfitting of training data may distort training module variables.

resultsThis study uses a 2-stage training method to solve the overfitting problem. In the training phase, to build the model, the Learning module 1 used to identify the DR and no-DR. The Learning module 2 on SMOTE synthetic datasets to identify the mild-NPDR, moderate NPDR, severe NPDR and proliferative DR classification. These two modules also used early stopping and data dividing methods to reduce overfitting by oversampling. In the test phase, we use the DIARETDB0, DIARETDB1, eOphtha, MESSIDOR, and DRIVE datasets to evaluate the performance of the training network. The prediction accuracy achieved to 85.38%, 84.27%, 85.75%, 86.73%, and 92.5%.

conclusionsBased on the experiment, a general deep learning model for detecting DR was developed, and it could be used with all DR databases. We provided a simple method of addressing the imbalance of DR databases, and this method can be used with other medical images.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDiabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyDatabases, FactualHumansRetinaDecision treeNasnet-largeOverfittingSMOTETransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID34749634
PMCPMC8576963
OpenAlexW3212502336

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.