ArticleScientific reports2022
Assessment of image quality on color fundus retinal images using the automatic retinal image analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. 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.
- Trial
- A Novel Convolutional Neural Network for Explainable Diabetic Retinopathy Detection and Grade Identification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Reach and implementation of human and AI-assisted diabetic retinopathy screening models in primary healthcare settings in India.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Assessing adoption of human and AI-enabled diabetic retinopathy screening in primary healthcare settings: findings from a pragmatic trial.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Real-World Evaluation of AI-Driven Diabetic Retinopathy Screening in Public Health Settings: Validation and Implementation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Retinal fundus image super-resolution based on generative adversarial network guided with vascular structure prior.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- ETDRS grading with CLARUS ultra-widefield images shows agreement with 7-fields colour fundus photography.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Deep Learning Identifies High-Quality Fundus Photographs and Increases Accuracy in Automated Primary Open Angle Glaucoma Detection.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Clinical validation of a smartphone-based retinal camera for diabetic retinopathy screening.Acta diabetologica · 2023Article
- EfficientNetV2 Based Ensemble Model for Quality Estimation of Diabetic Retinopathy Images from DeepDRiD.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Asteroid Hyalosis: An Update on Prevalence, Risk Factors, Emerging Clinical Impact and Management Strategies.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Review
- Automated Identification of Different Severity Levels of Diabetic Retinopathy Using a Handheld Fundus Camera and Single-Image Protocol.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
- Quantification of Fundus Autofluorescence Features in a Molecularly Characterized Cohort of >3500 Patients with Inherited Retinal Disease from the United Kingdom.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Image quality assessment is essential for retinopathy detection on color fundus retinal image. However, most studies focused on the classification of good and poor quality without considering the different types of poor quality. This study developed an automatic retinal image analysis (ARIA) method, incorporating transfer net ResNet50 deep network with the automatic features generation approach to automatically assess image quality, and distinguish eye-abnormality-associated-poor-quality from artefact-associated-poor-quality on color fundus retinal images. A total of 2434 retinal images, including 1439 good quality and 995 poor quality (483 eye-abnormality-associated-poor-quality and 512 artefact-associated-poor-quality), were used for training, testing, and 10-ford cross-validation. We also analyzed the external validation with the clinical diagnosis of eye abnormality as the reference standard to evaluate the performance of the method. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for testing good quality against poor quality were 98.0%, 99.1%, and 98.6%, and for differentiating between eye-abnormality-associated-poor-quality and artefact-associated-poor-quality were 92.2%, 93.8%, and 93.0%, respectively. In external validation, our method achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.997 for the overall quality classification and 0.915 for the classification of two types of poor quality. The proposed approach, ARIA, showed good performance in testing, 10-fold cross validation and external validation. This study provides a novel angle for image quality screening based on the different poor quality types and corresponding dealing methods. It suggested that the ARIA can be used as a screening tool in the preliminary stage of retinopathy grading by telemedicine or artificial intelligence analysis.
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.