Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41255841›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

Enhancing accessibility: a multi-level platform for visual question answering in diabetic retinopathy for individuals with disabilities.

Sarah Alotaibi, Suheer Al-Hadhrami, Saad Al-Ahmadi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sarah AlotaibiDepartment of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Suheer Al-HadhramiDepartment of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Saad Al-AhmadiDepartment of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals with visual disabilities possess impairments that affect their ability to perceive visual information, ranging from partial to complete vision loss. Visual disabilities affect about 2.2 billion people globally. In this paper, we introduce a new multi-level Visual Questioning Answering (VQA) framework for visually disabled people that leverages the strengths of various VQA models of the multi-level components to enhance system performance. The model relies on a bi-level architecture that employs two distinct layers. In the first level, the model classifies the question type. This classification guides the visual question to the appropriate component model in the second level. This bi-level architecture incorporates a switch function that enables the system to select the optimal VQA model for each specific question, hence enhancing overall accuracy. The experimental findings indicate that the multi-level VQA technique is significantly effective. The bi-level VQA model enhances the overall accuracy over the state-of-the-art from 87.41% to 88.41%. This finding suggests the use of multiple levels with different models can boost the VQA systems' performance. This research presents a promising direction for developing advanced, multi-level VQA systems. Future work may explore optimizing and experimenting with various model levels to enhance performance further.

Indexed as

disability-aware VQAELECTRAmedical visual question answeringMed-VQAmulti-level VQAquestion answeringSWINvision-language models

Identifiers

PMID41255841
PMCPMC12621105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.