Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35280876›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Screening of Common Retinal Diseases Using Six-Category Models Based on EfficientNet.

Shaojun Zhu, Bing Lu, Chenghu Wang, Maonian Wu, Bo Zheng, Qin Jiang, Ruili Wei, Qixin Cao, Weihua Yang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shaojun ZhuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Bing LuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Chenghu WangThe Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Maonian WuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Bo ZhengSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Qin JiangThe Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Ruili WeiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Changzheng Hospital, Huangpu, China.
Qixin CaoHuzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Huzhou, China.
Weihua YangThe Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Huzhou University · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University · CNShanghai Changzheng Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: A six-category model of common retinal diseases is proposed to help primary medical institutions in the preliminary screening of the five common retinal diseases. Methods: A total of 2,400 fundus images of normal and five common retinal diseases were provided by a cooperative hospital. Two six-category deep learning models of common retinal diseases based on the EfficientNet-B4 and ResNet50 models were trained. The results from the six-category models in this study and the results from a five-category model in our previous study based on ResNet50 were compared. A total of 1,315 fundus images were used to test the models, the clinical diagnosis results and the diagnosis results of the two six-category models were compared. The main evaluation indicators were sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, area under the curve (AUC), 95% confidence interval, kappa and accuracy, and the receiver operator characteristic curves of the two six-category models were compared in the study. Results: The diagnostic accuracy rate of EfficientNet-B4 model was 95.59%, the kappa value was 94.61%, and there was high diagnostic consistency. The AUC of the normal diagnosis and the five retinal diseases were all above 0.95. The sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score for the diagnosis of normal fundus images were 100, 99.9, and 99.83%, respectively. The specificity and F1-score for RVO diagnosis were 95.68, 98.61, and 93.09%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score for high myopia diagnosis were 96.1, 99.6, and 97.37%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score for glaucoma diagnosis were 97.62, 99.07, and 94.62%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score for DR diagnosis were 90.76, 99.16, and 93.3%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score for MD diagnosis were 92.27, 98.5, and 91.51%, respectively. Conclusion: The EfficientNet-B4 model was used to design a six-category model of common retinal diseases. It can be used to diagnose the normal fundus and five common retinal diseases based on fundus images. It can help primary doctors in the screening for common retinal diseases, and give suitable suggestions and recommendations. Timely referral can improve the efficiency of diagnosis of eye diseases in rural areas and avoid delaying treatment.

Indexed as

computer simulationfundusoptical imagingretinal diseasesvision screening

Identifiers

PMID35280876
PMCPMC8904395
OpenAlexW4214713293

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.