ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Detecting Inflammation in Fundus Photographs Using Machine Learning.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Blood-Ocular Barrier Dysfunction in Uveitis: A Bidirectional Model Linking Pathogenesis, Clinical Monitoring, and Therapeutic Opportunities.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To utilize a machine learning model for employing ultra-widefield fundus photograph (UWFFP) as a surrogate marker for ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography (UWFFA) in detecting posterior segment inflammation. Design: An evaluation of technology. Participants: Not applicable. Methods: Ultra-widefield fundus photographs were extracted and grouped based on the corresponding UWFFA images, which served as the ground truth, into those with signs of inflammation and those without. Vertex AI was used to train a machine learning model to detect the presence of inflammation using the UWFFPs. Furthermore, 2 masked dual fellowship-trained vitreoretinal and uveitis specialists, 1 glaucoma specialist, and 1 comprehensive ophthalmologist independently evaluated 20 additional UWFFPs, comparing their findings with the model's results. Main Outcome Measures: Area under the precision-recall curve, sensitivity, specificity, and comparative accuracy between the machine learning model and expert human graders. Results: A total of 302 UWFFPs, comprising 113 with inflammation and 189 without, were used to train a single-label image classification model. The trained model demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.943, sensitivity of 90.91%, and specificity of 84.21%. It correctly diagnosed the presence of inflammation in 95% of the extra UWFFPs, compared to the masked dual fellowship-trained vitreoretinal and uveitis specialists, glaucoma specialist, and comprehensive ophthalmologist, who achieved accuracies of 85%, 80%, 70%, and 65%, respectively. Conclusions: The index study demonstrated that UWFFPs could be employed as a noninvasive and more accessible imaging modality for detecting posterior segment inflammation using machine learning techniques. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.