Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36568576›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2022

Classification of dry and wet macular degeneration based on the ConvNeXT model.

Maonian Wu, Ying Lu, Xiangqian Hong, Jie Zhang, Bo Zheng, Shaojun Zhu, Naimei Chen, Zhentao Zhu, Weihua Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Maonian WuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Ying LuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Xiangqian HongShenzhen Eye Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, China.
Jie ZhangAdvanced Ophthalmology Laboratory, Brightview Medical Technologies (Nanjing) Co., Ltd., Nanjing, China.
Bo ZhengSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Shaojun ZhuSchool of Information Engineering, Huzhou University, Huzhou, China.
Naimei ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Huaian Hospital of Huaian City, Huaian, China.
Zhentao ZhuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Huaian Hospital of Huaian City, Huaian, China.
Weihua YangShenzhen Eye Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the value of an automated classification model for dry and wet macular degeneration based on the ConvNeXT model. Methods: A total of 672 fundus images of normal, dry, and wet macular degeneration were collected from the Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanjing Medical University and the fundus images of dry macular degeneration were expanded. The ConvNeXT three-category model was trained on the original and expanded datasets, and compared to the results of the VGG16, ResNet18, ResNet50, EfficientNetB7, and RegNet three-category models. A total of 289 fundus images were used to test the models, and the classification results of the models on different datasets were compared. The main evaluation indicators were sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, and kappa. Results: Using 289 fundus images, three-category models trained on the original and expanded datasets were assessed. The ConvNeXT model trained on the expanded dataset was the most effective, with a diagnostic accuracy of 96.89%, kappa value of 94.99%, and high diagnostic consistency. The sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and AUC values for normal fundus images were 100.00, 99.41, 99.59, and 99.80%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and AUC values for dry macular degeneration diagnosis were 87.50, 98.76, 90.32, and 97.10%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and AUC values for wet macular degeneration diagnosis were 97.52, 97.02, 96.72, and 99.10%, respectively. Conclusion: The ConvNeXT-based category model for dry and wet macular degeneration automatically identified dry and wet macular degeneration, aiding rapid, and accurate clinical diagnosis.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceConvNeXT modeldeep learningdry and wet macular degeneration classification modelsintelligent assisted diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID36568576
PMCPMC9773079

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.