ArticleBiomedical engineering online2025
Network architecture optimization for ophthalmic ultrasound image detection based on modular ablation of multi-version YOLO.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
objectivesTo address the absence of a systematic evaluation method for network architecture selection in ophthalmic ultrasound image detection tasks, this study proposes a modular ablation analysis framework based on orthogonal experimental design.
methodsA clinical data set comprising 1121 ocular ultrasound images was established. YOLOv10-v12 were decoupled into backbone, neck, and head modules. A three-stage evaluation was conducted: (1) single-module benchmarking, performed via controlled variable experiments; (2) orthogonal combination experiments using an L9(3
resultsThe backbone improved both accuracy and efficiency, while the neck and head exhibited a speed-accuracy trade-off. The neck most significantly influenced detection accuracy, and the head dominated computational efficiency. The optimal combination (Bv11-Nv11-Hv10) achieved 64.0% mAP at 26 FPS, while the mobile-optimized variant (Bv10-Nv10-Hv11) attained 63.5% mAP with only 8.6 MB parameters. Automatic and manual measurements showed strong agreement (mean absolute error ≤ 0.133 mm, ICC ≥ 0.839).
conclusionsThis study validates the feasibility of cross-version module combination. The proposed framework offers a systematic, quantitative decision-making basis for network design in ophthalmic ultrasound, balancing accuracy, speed, and deployment feasibility. Clinical results confirm high consistency between automatic and manual measurements, supporting automated and precise ocular biometry.
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.