ArticleScientific reports2026
Advanced computer-aided diagnosis for age-related macular degeneration: integrating segmentation and feature extraction for precise diagnosis.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of vision loss globally; necessitating early detection and precise diagnosis for effective intervention. This study presents a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system for AMD detection and diagnosis over two main stages; that are SegNet-MobileNet for segmentation and feature extraction for classification. The SegNet-MobileNet architecture merges the SegNet's precise segmentation with the MobileNet's efficacy; achieving high accuracy in delineating AMD lesions from retinal images. Also, the features extracted from regions of interest (ROIs) capture diverse aspects of retinal structure and texture mandatory for the AMD diagnosis. A dataset of 864 retinal images (accompanied by detailed demographic and clinical information) was collected and analyzed. Through the proper evaluation of ML algorithms, we reported that ensemble methods (such as CatBoost, Extra Trees, and XGBoost) demonstrate superior performance in distinguishing AMD cases, with accuracies exceeding 97%. Model explainability is utilized through the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) technique; providing insights into feature importance and model decision-making. This study demonstrates the potential of advanced methodologies in contributing to AMD diagnosis and laying the groundwork for future research directions in the ophthalmic imaging and diagnostic field. While promising, these results indicate the need for larger, multi-center validation to ensure generalizability.
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.