ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A New Deep Learning Algorithm with Activation Mapping for Diabetic Retinopathy: Backtesting after 10 Years of Tele-Ophthalmology.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of LuxIA, a Cloud-Based AI Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Tool Using a Single Color Fundus Image.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Using Color Retinal Photographs: From Development to Deployment.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report the development of a deep learning algorithm (AI) to detect signs of diabetic retinopathy (DR) from fundus images. For this, we use a ResNet-50 neural network with a double resolution, the addition of Squeeze-Excitation blocks, pre-trained in ImageNet, and trained for 50 epochs using the Adam optimizer. The AI-based algorithm not only classifies an image as pathological or not but also detects and highlights those signs that allow DR to be identified. For development, we have used a database of about half a million images classified in a real clinical environment by family doctors (FDs), ophthalmologists, or both. The AI was able to detect more than 95% of cases worse than mild DR and had 70% fewer misclassifications of healthy cases than FDs. In addition, the AI was able to detect DR signs in 1258 patients before they were detected by FDs, representing 7.9% of the total number of DR patients detected by the FDs. These results suggest that AI is at least comparable to the evaluation of FDs. We suggest that it may be useful to use signaling tools such as an aid to diagnosis rather than an AI as a stand-alone tool.
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.