ArticleBMJ open2025
Comparative performance of deep learning architectures for diabetic peripheral neuropathy detection using corneal confocal microscopy: a retrospective single-centre study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for detection, prediction, and severity classification of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Editorial: Imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of eye diseases.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to develop a deep learning algorithm (DLA) using the InceptionV3 architecture for effective diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) screening via corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) images.
designRetrospective study.
settingOphthalmology Centre of General Hospital.
participants127 participants enrolled: 33 healthy participants, 57 diabetic patients with DPN (DPN+) and 37 diabetic patients without DPN (DPN-).
interventionsNot applicable.
main outcome measuresThe CCM image dataset, which was collected from participants (with five images per eye), was randomly divided into training, validation and test subsets in a 7:1:2 ratio. The images were preprocessed, augmented and used to train the InceptionV3 model. We compared its performance against the ResNet, DenseNet and Swin Transformer models. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, recall, F1 score and area under the curve (AUC) metrics.
resultsFor single-participant predictions, the InceptionV3 model achieved the highest accuracy (0.9231), recall (0.8846), F1 score (0.9020) and AUC (0.9534) compared with the other models. For single-image predictions in the three-class classification task of CCM images, the InceptionV3 model achieved a precision of 0.8385, a recall of 0.9083, an F1 score of 0.8720 and an AUC of 0.8769 for predicting DPN+.
conclusionsThe InceptionV3-based DLA model achieved superior performance compared with traditional convolutional neural network architectures like ResNet and DenseNet, and the Swin transformer model, highlighting its potential for effective DPN screening.
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.