ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Comparison between Deep-Learning-Based Ultra-Wide-Field Fundus Imaging and True-Colour Confocal Scanning for Diagnosing Glaucoma.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in glaucoma: opportunities, challenges, and future directions.Biomedical engineering online · 2023Pooled it
- Multiple attention based deep multimodal fusion network for glaucoma and neurodegenerative disease diagnosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A fundus image dataset for intelligent diabetic retinopathy system.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Diagnosis of Glaucoma Based on Few-Shot Learning with Wide-Field Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Applications of deep learning for detecting ophthalmic diseases with ultrawide-field fundus images.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In this retrospective, comparative study, we evaluated and compared the performance of two confocal imaging modalities in detecting glaucoma based on a deep learning (DL) classifier: ultra-wide-field (UWF) fundus imaging and true-colour confocal scanning. A total of 777 eyes, including 273 normal control eyes and 504 glaucomatous eyes, were tested. A convolutional neural network was used for each true-colour confocal scan (Eidon AF™, CenterVue, Padova, Italy) and UWF fundus image (Optomap™, Optos PLC, Dunfermline, UK) to detect glaucoma. The diagnostic model was trained using 545 training and 232 test images. The presence of glaucoma was determined, and the accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) metrics were assessed for diagnostic power comparison. DL-based UWF fundus imaging achieved an AUC of 0.904 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.861−0.937) and accuracy of 83.62%. In contrast, DL-based true-colour confocal scanning achieved an AUC of 0.868 (95% CI: 0.824−0.912) and accuracy of 81.46%. Both DL-based confocal imaging modalities showed no significant differences in their ability to diagnose glaucoma (p = 0.135) and were comparable to the traditional optical coherence tomography parameter-based methods (all p > 0.005). Therefore, using a DL-based algorithm on true-colour confocal scanning and UWF fundus imaging, we confirmed that both confocal fundus imaging techniques had high value in diagnosing glaucoma.
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.