Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39085461›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Hybrid deep learning models for the screening of Diabetic Macular Edema in optical coherence tomography volumes.

Antonio Rodríguez-Miguel, Carolina Arruabarrena, Germán Allendes, Maximiliano Olivera, Javier Zarranz-Ventura, Miguel A Teus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

6 authors.

Antonio Rodríguez-MiguelDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Alcalá (IRYCIS), 28871, Madrid, Spain. antonio.rodriguezmig@uah.es.
Carolina ArruabarrenaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Retina Unit, University Hospital "Príncipe de Asturias", 28805, Madrid, Spain.
Germán AllendesDepartment of Ophthalmology, Retina Unit, University Hospital "Príncipe de Asturias", 28805, Madrid, Spain.
Maximiliano OliveraInstitute of Ophthalmology "Fernández-Vega", 28802, Madrid, Spain.
Javier Zarranz-VenturaHospital Clínic de Barcelona, University of Barcelona, 08036, Barcelona, Spain.
Miguel A TeusDepartment of Surgery, Medical and Social Sciences (Ophthalmology), University of Alcalá, 28871, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

Biomedical Research Foundation of the University Hospital "Príncipe de Asturias" FIB-PI19-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies published so far used highly selective image datasets from unclear sources to train computer vision models and that may lead to overestimated results, while those studies conducted in real-life remain scarce. To avoid image selection bias, we stacked convolutional and recurrent neural networks (CNN-RNN) to analyze complete optical coherence tomography (OCT) cubes in a row and predict diabetic macular edema (DME), in a real-world diabetic retinopathy screening program. A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Throughout 4-years, 5314 OCT cubes from 4408 subjects who attended to the diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening program were included. We arranged twenty-two (22) pre-trained CNNs in parallel with a bidirectional RNN layer stacked at the bottom, allowing the model to make a prediction for the whole OCT cube. The staff of retina experts built a ground truth of DME later used to train a set of these CNN-RNN models with different configurations. For each trained CNN-RNN model, we performed threshold tuning to find the optimal cut-off point for binary classification of DME. Finally, the best models were selected according to sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) with their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). An ensemble of the best models was also explored. 5188 cubes were non-DME and 126 were DME. Three models achieved an AUROC of 0.94. Among these, sensitivity, and specificity (95%CI) ranged from 84.1-90.5 and 89.7-93.3, respectively, at threshold 1, from 89.7-92.1 and 80-83.1 at threshold 2, and from 80.2-81 and 93.8-97, at threshold 3. The ensemble model improved these results, and lower specificity was observed among subjects with sight-threatening DR. Analysis by age, gender, or grade of DME did not vary the performance of the models. CNN-RNN models showed high diagnostic accuracy for detecting DME in a real-world setting. This engine allowed us to detect extra-foveal DMEs commonly overlooked in other studies, and showed potential for application as the first filter of non-referable patients in an outpatient center within a population-based DR screening program, otherwise ended up in specialized care.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDiabetic RetinopathyMacular EdemaTomography, Optical CoherenceAgedFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerRetrospective StudiesROC CurveDeep learningDiabetic Macular EdemaDiabetic RetinopathyOptical Coherence TomographyScreeningTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39085461
PMCPMC11291805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.