ArticleSovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine2024
Application of Deep Learning Algorithms Based on the Multilayer Y0L0v8 Neural Network to Identify Fungal Keratitis.
Article in Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Integration of Transformer-Based Architecture and Large Language Models for Optical Coherence Tomography Data Analysis to Improve the Accuracy of Differential Diagnosis of Retinal Diseases.Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2026Article
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
Materials and Methods: The study has included the stages of data acquisition, image pre-training and markup, selection of training approach and neural network architecture, training with input data augmentation, validation with hyperparameter correction, evaluation of algorithm performance on a test sample, and determination of sensitivity and specificity of fungal keratitis detection by practicing doctors. A total of 274 anterior segment images were used, including 130 photographs of the eyes affected by fungal keratitis and 144 photographs illustrating normal eyes, keratitis of other etiologies, and various anterior segment pathologies. Photographs taken after the treatment onset, illustrations of keratitis of mixed etiology and corneal perforation were excluded from the study. Images of the training sample were marked up using the VGG Image Annotator web application and then used to train the YOLOv8 convolutional neural network. Images from the test data set were also offered to practicing ophthalmologists to determine the diagnostic accuracy of fungal keratitis. Results: The sensitivity of the model was 56.0%, the specificity level reached 96.1%, and the proportion of correct answers of the algorithm was 76.5%. The accuracy of image recognition by practicing ophthalmologists was 50.0%, specificity - 41.7%, sensitivity - 57.7%. Conclusion: The study showed the high potential of deep learning algorithms in the diagnosis of fungal keratitis and its advantages in accuracy compared to expert judgment in the absence of metadata. The use of computer vision technologies may find application as a complementary diagnostic method in decision making in complex cases and in telemedicine care settings. Further research is required to compare the developed model with alternative approaches, to expand and standardize databases.
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.