ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2026
Interpretable Deep Learning for OCT-Based Diagnosis of Vitreoretinal Lymphoma Versus Uveitis.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To develop and validate an interpretable deep learning model that classifies optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans as vitreoretinal lymphoma (VRL) or non-infectious uveitis (NIU)-intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis-and visualizes differentiating pathological OCT features. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 45 patients with VRL and 52 with NIU who underwent SPECTRALIS OCT imaging. OCT B-scans were analyzed with a custom-designed deep convolutional neural network classification model combined with gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM). Interpretability was assessed using Grad-CAM heat maps that visualize disease-specific OCT features. We evaluated diagnostic performance at the eye level using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), accuracy, F1 score, precision, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa. Results: The model differentiated VRL from NIU at the eye level, with mean ± SD scores of 76.0 ± 8.0 for AUROC, 79.4 ± 10.4 for AUPRC, 75.4 ± 13.3 for accuracy, 74.9 ± 13.7 for F1 score, 73.9 ± 19.3 for precision, 77.7 ± 13.6 for sensitivity, 73.4 ± 20.7 for specificity, and 51.0 ± 26.6 for kappa. Grad-CAM features of VRL included preretinal deposits and changes in the retinal pigment epithelium. In contrast, NIU features included denser vitreous cells and opacities, epiretinal membrane, intraretinal cells, and choroidal and scleral abnormalities consistent with NIU pathophysiology. Conclusions: A deep learning model with interpretability can reliably differentiate VRL from NIU, highlighting disease-relevant OCT features. Translational Relevance: The proposed deep learning method may serve as a non-invasive triage tool by identifying patients who need confirmatory pars plana vitrectomy.
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.