SynthesisJournal of digital imaging2022
A Detailed Systematic Review on Retinal Image Segmentation Methods.
Synthesis in Journal of digital imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-Enabled Mucus Segmentation in Nasal Endoscopy with State Space and Attention-Based Modeling.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based segmentation of small renal masses: a multi-center, multi-scanner, multi-sequence study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- RAUM-GANs: a multi-layer GAN-enhanced framework for accurate multiple sclerosis lesion segmentation in MRI.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Method for Peripapillary Retinal Vessel Tortuosity Measurement and Its Clinical Correspondence.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- VESCL: an open source 2D vessel contouring library.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Deep Learning Approach for Differentiating Etiologies of Pediatric Retinal Hemorrhages: A Multicenter Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The separation of blood vessels in the retina is a major aspect in detecting ailment and is carried out by segregating the retinal blood vessels from the fundus images. Moreover, it helps to provide earlier therapy for deadly diseases and prevent further impacts due to diabetes and hypertension. Many reviews already exist for this problem, but those reviews have presented the analysis of a single framework. Hence, this article on retinal segmentation review has revealed distinct methodologies with diverse frameworks that are utilized for blood vessel separation. The novelty of this review research lies in finding the best neural network model by comparing its efficiency. For that, machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) were compared and have been reported as the best model. Moreover, different datasets were used to segment the retinal blood vessels. The execution of each approach is compared based on the performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy using publically accessible datasets like STARE, DRIVE, ROSE, REFUGE, and CHASE. This article discloses the implementation capacity of distinct techniques implemented for each segmentation method. Finally, the finest accuracy of 98% and sensitivity of 96% were achieved for the technique of Convolution Neural Network with Ranking Support Vector Machine (CNN-rSVM). Moreover, this technique has utilized public datasets to verify efficiency. Hence, the overall review of this article has revealed a method for earlier diagnosis of diseases to deliver earlier therapy.
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.