Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41147946›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025

Uveal Pigmented Lesion Classification, Detection, and Segmentation: A Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Tasks.

Virginia Tasso, Sanjay Ganesh, Sabrina Iddir, Reem AlAhmadi, Michael J Heiferman, Darvin Yi

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Virginia TassoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sanjay GaneshDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sabrina IddirDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Reem AlAhmadiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Michael J HeifermanDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Darvin YiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

Strengthening Stakeholder Engagement in Human Research Protections.UL1TR002003 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI KARNIK, NIRANJAN SUBHASH, MERMELSTEIN, ROBIN J. · 2016 to 2024
$33.7M
Translational Core for Therapeutic and Diagnostic DevelopmentP30EY001792 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI SHUKLA, DEEPAK · 1985 to 2025
$14.8M
UIC K12 Independent Clinical Vision Scientist Development ProgramK12EY021475 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI ALI R DJALILIAN, CHARLOTTE E JOSLIN · 2011 to 2026
$6.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002003NEI NIH HHS K12 EY021475NEI NIH HHS P30 EY001792
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common intraocular malignancy in adults, with high metastatic risk and poor prognosis. Current screening and triaging methods for melanocytic choroidal tumors face inherent limitations, particularly in regions with limited access to specialized ocular oncologists. This study proposes a reference framework for future research in UM detection. It highlights the trade-offs between different computer vision (CV) approaches based on data availability, computer resources, annotation effort, and clinical applicability. Methods: In total, 864 Optos images of UM, choroidal nevi, and congenital hypertrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium were included in the study. Three CV models-classification, detection, and segmentation-were implemented using a shared ResNet-50 backbone. Performance metrics included area under the curve (AUC) for classification, F1 score for detection, and Dice score for segmentation. An ablation study evaluated robustness to data scarcity. Model interpretability was enhanced through Grad-CAM visualizations and confusion matrices. Results: Classification, detection, and segmentation achieved AUC scores of 94%, 93%, and 95%, respectively. Segmentation showed the best F1 score (89%) and a Dice score of 75%. Classification performed the best with limited data. Conclusions: In high-resource scenarios (100+ images), all models performed similarly, while in low-resource scenarios (<70 images), the classification model outperformed the others. This suggests that simpler models may offer better value for classification tasks with limited resources. Translational Relevance: Given different CV algorithms' different clinical use cases and development costs, this study takes a comparative look at these algorithms for the task of UM analysis on ultra-widefield fundus images.

Indexed as

Choroid NeoplasmsMachine LearningMelanomaNevus, PigmentedUveal NeoplasmsHumansUveal Melanoma

Identifiers

PMID41147946
PMCPMC12577739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.