ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021
General deep learning model for detecting diabetic retinopathy.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Interpretable Machine Learning Models Using Systemic Inflammation Index to Predict Preterm Birth in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Hybrid quantum-classical deep learning framework for balanced multiclass diabetic retinopathy classification.MethodsX · 2025Article
- QuantumNet: An enhanced diabetic retinopathy detection model using classical deep learning-quantum transfer learning.MethodsX · 2025Article
- A deep learning based model for diabetic retinopathy grading.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in proliferative diabetic retinopathy: advancing diagnosis, precision surgery, and anti-VEGF therapy optimization.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Deep learning based binary classification of diabetic retinopathy images using transfer learning approach.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2024Article
- A systematic review on diabetic retinopathy detection and classification based on deep learning techniques using fundus images.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
- Interpretable machine learning model to predict surgical difficulty in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Prediction of five-year survival among esophageal cancer patients using machine learning.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence for assessing the severity of microtiaFrontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Using random forest algorithm for glomerular and tubular injury diagnosis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Machine learning-based warning model for chronic kidney disease in individuals over 40 years old in underprivileged areas, Shanxi Province.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- 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/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.