ArticleOphthalmology science
Validation of Deep Learning-Based Automatic Retinal Layer Segmentation Algorithms for Age-Related Macular Degeneration with 2 Spectral-Domain OCT Devices.
Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-Based Automated Segmentation and Quantification of the Ellipsoid Zone and the RPE-Bruch's Membrane Complex in Healthy Subjects and in Geographic Atrophy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison of Retinal Thickness Measurements Using Optos Monaco and Heidelberg Spectralis OCT Across ETDRS Sectors in Normal Eyes.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Precision Therapeutics for Advancing the Diagnosis and Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Recent Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Innovations for Increased Accessibility and Remote Surveillance.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Segmentations of retinal layers in spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT) images serve as a crucial tool for identifying and analyzing the progression of various retinal diseases, encompassing a broad spectrum of abnormalities associated with age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The training of deep learning algorithms necessitates well-defined ground truth labels, validated by experts, to delineate boundaries accurately. However, this resource-intensive process has constrained the widespread application of such algorithms across diverse OCT devices. This work validates deep learning image segmentation models across multiple OCT devices by testing robustness in generating clinically relevant metrics. Design: Prospective comparative study. Participants: Adults >50 years of age with no AMD to advanced AMD, as defined in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study, in ≥1 eye, were enrolled. Four hundred two SD-OCT scans were used in this study. Methods: We evaluate 2 separate state-of-the-art segmentation algorithms through a training process using images obtained from 1 OCT device (Heidelberg-Spectralis) and subsequent testing using images acquired from 2 OCT devices (Heidelberg-Spectralis and Zeiss-Cirrus). This assessment is performed on a dataset that encompasses a range of retinal pathologies, spanning from disease-free conditions to severe forms of AMD, with a focus on evaluating the device independence of the algorithms. Main Outcome Measures: Performance metrics (including mean squared error, mean absolute error [MAE], and Dice coefficients) for the segmentations of the internal limiting membrane (ILM), retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), and RPE to Bruch's membrane region, along with en face thickness maps, volumetric estimations (in mm Results: The UNet and DeepLabv3, trained on Spectralis B-scans, demonstrate clinically useful outcomes when applied to Cirrus test B-scans. Review of the Cirrus test data by 2 independent annotators revealed that the aggregated MAE in pixels for ILM was 1.82 ± 0.24 (equivalent to 7.0 ± 0.9 μm) and for RPE was 2.46 ± 0.66 (9.5 ± 2.6 μm). Additionally, the Dice similarity coefficient for the RPE drusen complex region, comparing predictions to ground truth, reached 0.87 ± 0.01. Conclusions: In the pursuit of task-specific goals such as retinal layer segmentation, a segmentation network has the capacity to acquire domain-independent features from a large training dataset. This enables the utilization of the network to execute tasks in domains where ground truth is hard to generate. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.