ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2022
Efficient labeling of retinal fundus photographs using deep active learning.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 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.
- Active Learning Under Expert-Budget Constraints: A Human-in-the-Loop Pipeline for Diabetic Retinopathy Lesion Detection.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Sickle Cell Retinopathy Imaging: Current Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the performance of four deep active learning (DAL) approaches to optimize label efficiency for training diabetic retinopathy (DR) classification deep learning models. Approach: 88,702 color retinal fundus photographs from 44,351 patients with DR grades from the publicly available EyePACS dataset were used. Four DAL approaches [entropy sampling (ES), Bayesian active learning by disagreement (BALD), core set, and adversarial active learning (ADV)] were compared to conventional naive random sampling. Models were compared at various dataset sizes using Cohen's kappa (CK) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve on an internal test set of 10,000 images. An independent test set of 3662 fundus photographs was used to assess generalizability. Results: On the internal test set, 3 out of 4 DAL methods resulted in statistically significant performance improvements ( Conclusions: Uncertainty-based and feature descriptor-based deep active learning methods outperformed random sampling on both the internal and independent test sets at multiclass classification. However, binary classification performance remained similar across random sampling and active learning methods.
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.