ArticleOphthalmology science
Multi-Comparison of Different Ocular Imaging Modality-based Deep Learning Models for Visually Significant Cataract Detection.
Article in Ophthalmology science. 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.
- Multi-Granularity Mask-Guided Network: An Integrated AI Framework for Region-Level Segmentation and Grading of Cataract Subtypes on AS-OCT Images.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction of Cataract Severity Using Slit Lamp Images from a Portable Smartphone Device: A Pilot Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Age-related cataract is the leading cause of vision impairment. Researchers have utilized various imaging modalities, including slit beam, diffuse anterior segment, and retinal imaging, to develop deep learning (DL) algorithms for automated cataract analysis. However, the comparative performance of these algorithms across different ocular imaging modalities remains unevaluated, mainly due to the absence of standardized test sets across studies. Design: Retrospective study. Participants: Across all the models, the Singapore Malay Eye Study data set was used for training (N = 7093 eyes) and internal testing (N = 1649 eyes). The Singapore Indian Eye Study (SINDI; N = 5579 eyes) and the Singapore Chinese Eye Study (SCES; N = 5658 eyes) were used for external testing. A community study data set of nonmydriatic retinal photos (N = 310 eyes) was used for external testing of the retinal model. Methods: We developed 3 single-modality DL models (retinal, slit beam, and diffuse anterior segment photos) and 4 ensemble models (4 different combinations of the 3 single-modality models) to detect visually significant cataract (VSC). We defined eyes with VSC as having significant cataract (based on the modified Wisconsin cataract grading system) with a best-corrected visual acuity of <20/60. Main Outcome Measures: Area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: In the internal test, the retinal model had the highest AUC value (97.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 95.9-98.2), compared with the slit beam model (AUC, 93.4%; 95% CI, 90.1-96.7; Conclusions: Our findings highlight the retinal model as a promising tool for detecting VSC, outperforming slit beam and diffuse anterior segment models. Because retinal photography is routine in diabetic retinopathy screening, this approach could enable opportunistic cataract screening with minimal add-on cost. Financial Disclosure: 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.