ArticleOphthalmology. Retina2022
Federated Learning for Multicenter Collaboration in Ophthalmology: Improving Classification Performance in Retinopathy of Prematurity.
Article in Ophthalmology. Retina, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Federated machine learning in healthcare: A systematic review on clinical applications and technical architecture.Cell reports. Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Automated Report Generation in Ophthalmology: Integrating Artificial Intelligence, Multimodal Imaging, and Clinical Data.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Federated Deep Learning Approaches for Detecting Ocular Diseases in Medical Imaging: A Systematic Review.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Optical Coherence Tomography in Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Review
- A Clinician's Guide to Sharing Data for AI in Ophthalmology.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Review
- Focused review on artificial intelligence for disease detection in infants.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Review
- Deep learning in optical coherence tomography: Where are the gaps?Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2023Review
- Retinal Scans and Data Sharing: The Privacy and Scientific Development Equilibrium.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2023Review
- Collaborative Privacy-preserving Approaches for Distributed Deep Learning Using Multi-Institutional Data.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023Article
- Federated learning for diagnosis of age-related macular degeneration.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Federated Learning in Ocular Imaging: Current Progress and Future Direction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Towards More Efficient Data Valuation in Healthcare Federated Learning using Ensembling.Distributed, collaborative, and federated learning, and affordable AI and healthcare for resource diverse global health : Third MICCAI Workshop, DeCaF 2022 and Second MICCAI Workshop, FAIR 2022, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2022, Sin... · 2022Article
- Federated Learning for Multicenter Collaboration in Ophthalmology: Implications for Clinical Diagnosis and Disease Epidemiology.Ophthalmology. Retina · 2022Article
- Federated Learning in Glaucoma: A Comprehensive Review and Future Perspectives.Ophthalmology. GlaucomaReview
- Artificial intelligence and digital solutions for myopia.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
- Performance of Automated Machine Learning in Predicting Outcomes of Pneumatic Retinopexy.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the performance of deep learning classifiers for the diagnosis of plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) trained using 2 methods for developing models on multi-institutional data sets: centralizing data versus federated learning (FL) in which no data leave each institution.
designEvaluation of a diagnostic test or technology. SUBJECTS: Deep learning models were trained, validated, and tested on 5255 wide-angle retinal images in the neonatal intensive care units of 7 institutions as part of the Imaging and Informatics in ROP study. All images were labeled for the presence of plus, preplus, or no plus disease with a clinical label and a reference standard diagnosis (RSD) determined by 3 image-based ROP graders and the clinical diagnosis.
methodsWe compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for models developed on multi-institutional data, using a central approach initially, followed by FL, and compared locally trained models with both approaches. We compared the model performance (κ) with the label agreement (between clinical and RSD), data set size, and number of plus disease cases in each training cohort using the Spearman correlation coefficient (CC).
main outcome measuresModel performance using AUROC and linearly weighted κ.
resultsFour settings of experiment were used: FL trained on RSD against central trained on RSD, FL trained on clinical labels against central trained on clinical labels, FL trained on RSD against central trained on clinical labels, and FL trained on clinical labels against central trained on RSD (P = 0.046, P = 0.126, P = 0.224, and P = 0.0173, respectively). Four of the 7 (57%) models trained on local institutional data performed inferiorly to the FL models. The model performance for local models was positively correlated with the label agreement (between clinical and RSD labels, CC = 0.389, P = 0.387), total number of plus cases (CC = 0.759, P = 0.047), and overall training set size (CC = 0.924, P = 0.002).
conclusionsWe found that a trained FL model performs comparably to a centralized model, confirming that FL may provide an effective, more feasible solution for interinstitutional learning. Smaller institutions benefit more from collaboration than larger institutions, showing the potential of FL for addressing disparities in resource access.
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.