ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Research on the construction of an AI diagnostic model for plus disease of retinopathy of prematurity based on cross-center fusion datasets.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a leading cause of blindness in infants. Early and accurate screening is essential. Current deep learning systems can help, yet their accuracy drops when used on different population. We aimed to find the best deep learning model for plus disease in ROP and to test it on a multi-center dataset. Methods: We built a cross-center retinal image database by merging public and private sets (FARFUM-RoP, HVDROPDB, LAN-RoP, Preterm infants <34 weeks GA from three tertiary NICUs, 2635 images). Nine types models were compared: ResNet34, ResNet50, DenseNet, Inception, MobileNet, VGG16, VGG19, EfficientNet, and Swin-Transformer. We compared FLOPs, parameter count, accuracy, recall, precision, and F1 score. ResNet50 showed the best balance and was kept. Ten-fold cross-validation was run on FARFUM-RoP alone, LAN-RoP alone, and their combined set. Results: Across the three diagnostic tasks, the ResNet50 algorithm attained area-under-the-curve (AUC) values of 0.97, 0.95 and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94-0.99, 0.91-0.98, 0.97-1.00) for Normal, Pre-plus and Plus disease, respectively. When trained on the consolidated multi-centre cohort, the model achieved optimal overall performance, delivering an accuracy of 92.60%, recall of 92.58%, precision of 92.69% and F1-score of 92.60%-all metrics surpassing those obtained with any single-centre training set. Conclusion: Compared with single-centre training, the cross-centre fusion strategy significantly enhanced the generalisability of the artificial-intelligence model, yielded superior diagnostic indices, and improved diagnostic accuracy for infants from diverse demographic backgrounds.
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.