ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
In-Depth Evaluation of Saliency Maps for Interpreting Convolutional Neural Network Decisions in the Diagnosis of Glaucoma Based on Fundus Imaging.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Saliency-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Visual Explanations.KDD : proceedings. International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining · 2025Article
- A comparative study of machine learning models for automated detection and classification of retinal diseases in Ghana.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Glaucoma, a leading cause of blindness, damages the optic nerve, making early diagnosis challenging due to no initial symptoms. Fundus eye images taken with a non-mydriatic retinograph help diagnose glaucoma by revealing structural changes, including the optic disc and cup. This research aims to thoroughly analyze saliency maps in interpreting convolutional neural network decisions for diagnosing glaucoma from fundus images. These maps highlight the most influential image regions guiding the network's decisions. Various network architectures were trained and tested on 739 optic nerve head images, with nine saliency methods used. Some other popular datasets were also used for further validation. The results reveal disparities among saliency maps, with some consensus between the folds corresponding to the same architecture. Concerning the significance of optic disc sectors, there is generally a lack of agreement with standard medical criteria. The background, nasal, and temporal sectors emerge as particularly influential for neural network decisions, showing a likelihood of being the most relevant ranging from 14.55% to 28.16% on average across all evaluated datasets. We can conclude that saliency maps are usually difficult to interpret and even the areas indicated as the most relevant can be very unintuitive. Therefore, its usefulness as an explanatory tool may be compromised, at least in problems such as the one addressed in this study, where the features defining the model prediction are generally not consistently reflected in relevant regions of the saliency maps, and they even cannot always be related to those used as medical standards.
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.