ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2026
An Evaluation of the Mean Teacher Framework for Semi-Supervised Cataract Surgical Image Segmentation.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a semi-supervised Mean Teacher (MT) framework for semantic segmentation of cataract surgical images, addressing the challenge of limited labeled data in real-world clinical applications. Methods: We adapted the MT framework for four-class segmentation of the iris, pupil, intraocular lens, and surgical instruments using a small labeled set and 40,000 unlabeled Cataract-1K frames. Performance was assessed using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and the 95th percentile Hausdorff Distance (HD95). MT was compared with a fully supervised UNet under varying labeled and unlabeled conditions, and additional baselines provided broader context. Ablation studies evaluated noise types and key hyperparameters, including consistency weight (λ) and exponential moving average (EMA) decay (α). Internal validation used Cataract-1K, and external testing was done on CaDIS and CatInstSeg. Results: Our MT model consistently outperformed the supervised UNet baseline. With 100 labeled images and 40,000 unlabeled frames, MT achieved a DSC of 0.76 ± 0.12 compared to UNet with 0.59 ± 0.17 (t = 21.23, P < 0.05). On CaDIS and CatInstSeg, MT reached DSCs of 0.69 ± 0.17 and 0.71 ± 0.20, outperforming UNet at 0.62 ± 0.08 and 0.64 ± 0.23. Optimal performance was observed with λ = 0.1, α = 0.995, and Gaussian noise σ = 15. Conclusions: The MT framework provides an effective semi-supervised solution for surgical image segmentation with limited annotations. Full source code and utility scripts will be released upon acceptance at: https://github.com/mahtabfaraji1/Semi-supervised-segmentation-of-cataract-surgical-images. Translational Relevance: Accurate segmentation of ocular anatomy and instruments supports surgical guidance, intraoperative decision making, and training tools in data-limited clinical environments.
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.