Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36501801›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Comparing the Clinical Viability of Automated Fundus Image Segmentation Methods.

Gorana Gojić, Veljko B Petrović, Dinu Dragan, Dušan B Gajić, Dragiša Mišković, Vladislav Džinić, Zorka Grgić, Jelica Pantelić, Ana Oros

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 1 institution in 1 country.

Gorana GojićThe Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research and Development of Serbia, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0002-6100-5871
Veljko B PetrovićFaculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0001-8662-1366
Dinu DraganFaculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0001-8623-1923
Dušan B GajićFaculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0003-0495-8788
Dragiša MiškovićThe Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research and Development of Serbia, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0002-0455-9552
Vladislav DžinićEye Clinic Džinić, 21107 Novi Sad, Serbia.
Zorka GrgićEye Clinic Džinić, 21107 Novi Sad, Serbia.
Jelica PantelićInstitute of Eye Diseases, University Clinical Center of Serbia, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.
Ana OrosEye Clinic Džinić, 21107 Novi Sad, Serbia.
University of Novi Sad · RS

Funding

Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, under project "Research at the Faculty of Technical Sciences" no grant numberThe Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research and Development of Serbia no grant number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent methods for automatic blood vessel segmentation from fundus images have been commonly implemented as convolutional neural networks. While these networks report high values for objective metrics, the clinical viability of recovered segmentation masks remains unexplored. In this paper, we perform a pilot study to assess the clinical viability of automatically generated segmentation masks in the diagnosis of diseases affecting retinal vascularization. Five ophthalmologists with clinical experience were asked to participate in the study. The results demonstrate low classification accuracy, inferring that generated segmentation masks cannot be used as a standalone resource in general clinical practice. The results also hint at possible clinical infeasibility in experimental design. In the follow-up experiment, we evaluate the clinical quality of masks by having ophthalmologists rank generation methods. The ranking is established with high intra-observer consistency, indicating better subjective performance for a subset of tested networks. The study also demonstrates that objective metrics are not correlated with subjective metrics in retinal segmentation tasks for the methods involved, suggesting that objective metrics commonly used in scientific papers to measure the method's performance are not plausible criteria for choosing clinically robust solutions.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsNeural Networks, ComputerFundus OculiImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPilot Projectsclinical viabilityconvolutional neural networksfundus imageobjective metricssegmentationsegmentation masksubjective assessmentsubjective metrics

Identifiers

PMID36501801
PMCPMC9735987
OpenAlexW4309852941

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.