Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36050364›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

A comparison of deep learning U-Net architectures for posterior segment OCT retinal layer segmentation.

Jason Kugelman, Joseph Allman, Scott A Read, Stephen J Vincent, Janelle Tong, Michael Kalloniatis, Fred K Chen, Michael J Collins, David Alonso-Caneiro

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Exploring the relationship between 24-2 visual field and widefield optical coherence tomography data across healthy, glaucoma suspect and glaucoma eyes.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Characterisation of the normal human ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer using widefield optical coherence tomography.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024
    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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jason KugelmanContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia. j.kugelman@qut.edu.au.
Joseph AllmanContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Scott A ReadContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Stephen J VincentContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Janelle TongCentre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michael KalloniatisCentre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Fred K ChenCentre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Incorporating Lions Eye Institute), The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Michael J CollinsContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia.
David Alonso-CaneiroContact Lens and Visual Optics Laboratory, Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology · AUUNSW Sydney · AULions Eye Institute · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning methods have enabled a fast, accurate and automated approach for retinal layer segmentation in posterior segment OCT images. Due to the success of semantic segmentation methods adopting the U-Net, a wide range of variants and improvements have been developed and applied to OCT segmentation. Unfortunately, the relative performance of these methods is difficult to ascertain for OCT retinal layer segmentation due to a lack of comprehensive comparative studies, and a lack of proper matching between networks in previous comparisons, as well as the use of different OCT datasets between studies. In this paper, a detailed and unbiased comparison is performed between eight U-Net architecture variants across four different OCT datasets from a range of different populations, ocular pathologies, acquisition parameters, instruments and segmentation tasks. The U-Net architecture variants evaluated include some which have not been previously explored for OCT segmentation. Using the Dice coefficient to evaluate segmentation performance, minimal differences were noted between most of the tested architectures across the four datasets. Using an extra convolutional layer per pooling block gave a small improvement in segmentation performance for all architectures across all four datasets. This finding highlights the importance of careful architecture comparison (e.g. ensuring networks are matched using an equivalent number of layers) to obtain a true and unbiased performance assessment of fully semantic models. Overall, this study demonstrates that the vanilla U-Net is sufficient for OCT retinal layer segmentation and that state-of-the-art methods and other architectural changes are potentially unnecessary for this particular task, especially given the associated increased complexity and slower speed for the marginal performance gains observed. Given the U-Net model and its variants represent one of the most commonly applied image segmentation methods, the consistent findings across several datasets here are likely to translate to many other OCT datasets and studies. This will provide significant value by saving time and cost in experimentation and model development as well as reduced inference time in practice by selecting simpler models.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRetina

Identifiers

PMID36050364
PMCPMC9437058
OpenAlexW4294001777

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.