ArticleScientific reports2026
Early retinal disease detection from fundus images using deep neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Manual diagnosis of retinal diseases from fundus images is slow, subjective, and highly dependent on specialist availability, an ongoing challenge in low-resource regions that leads to delayed treatment and preventable vision loss. This study aims to develop a high-accuracy, automated deep learning framework for early detection of multiple retinal diseases using fundus images, with emphasis on methodological transparency, comparative model evaluation, and applicability in real clinical environments. A dataset of 3,848 labeled fundus images from the University of Gondar Referral Hospital was preprocessed using histogram equalization, noise reduction, normalization, and targeted augmentation to address class imbalance. Five pre-trained CNN architectures, VGG19, ResNet50, InceptionV3, MobileNetV2, and DenseNet201, were fine-tuned using transfer learning. Models were evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, AUC-ROC, and confusion matrices. DenseNet201 achieved the best performance with 92.78% accuracy, demonstrating balanced and superior class-wise detection: F1-scores of 0.98 (Normal), 0.92 (Glaucoma), 0.92 (DR), and 0.86 (AMD). The confusion matrix showed minimal misclassification, with high recall for the underrepresented AMD class (0.91). DenseNet201 consistently outperformed all competing models. The study validates DenseNet201 as a robust, high-accuracy model for early multi-disease retinal screening on a novel, region-specific dataset. The proposed framework offers a scalable, automated diagnostic tool capable of reducing clinical workload and enhancing screening coverage in underserved settings.
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.