ArticlePloS one2025
Deep learning detection of retinal detachment: Optical coherence tomography staging and estimation of duration of macular detachment.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- A Comparative Analysis of Deep Convolutional Networks for Automated Diagnosis of Retinal Detachment in Dogs.Veterinary 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test the applicability of deep learning models for detecting and staging rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) based on morphological features using two- and three-dimensional optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans.
designRetrospective study using deep learning-based image classification analysis of 2D and 3D OCT scans combined with clinical baseline data. SUBJECTS: Adult patients presenting to the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany.
methodsA total of 252 eyes with RRD and 770 control eyes were included. All OCT scans and clinical baseline data were reviewed and graded. Binary and multiclass classification approaches were applied.
main outcome measuresArea under the curve (AUC) and precision-recall area under the curve (PR AUC) for detection, stage classification and duration estimation of RRD.
resultsWe employed both statistical and deep learning-based approaches using 2D and 3D OCT data. We evaluated an automated 3D OCT classification model in a multiclass analysis to distinguish RRD scans by macula status from a non-RRD group with macula-on cases (PR AUC = 0.66 ± 0.12, AUC = 0.96 ± 0.01) vs. macula-off cases (PR AUC = 0.86 ± 0.07, 0.98 ± 0.01) against non-RRD cases (PR AUC = 1.00, AUC = 1.00) Furthermore, the 3D model was able to classify the duration of macula-off status (< 3 days) with a PR AUC of 0.68 ± 0.2 and a AUC of 0.97 ± 0.2 when compared to a mixed group including longer macular-off, macular-on and non RRD cases. Lastly, manually graded RRD Stages were correlated with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), as well as macula-off Duration and classified via a 2D model. A 2D model used for RRD stage classification achieved its best performance for stage 4, with a PR AUC of 0.56 ± 0.11 and an AUC of 0.94 ± 0.02.
conclusionThe machine learning models demonstrated strong performance in classifying RRD stages, macula status and duration based on OCT imaging. These findings highlight the potential of deep learning methods to support clinical decision-making and surgical planning in RRD management.
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.