ArticleScientific reports2026
Quantifying regional contributions to sex classification from fundus photographs via a two-stage attention-based deep learning approach.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study quantitatively assesses the relative contribution of anatomically defined retinal regions (macula, optic disc, and retinal vasculature) to biological sex classification from fundus photographs. We developed a two-stage multi-branch framework using pre-trained ResNet50 backbones for region-specific feature extraction and an attention-based fusion module that produces ROI-level scalar weights. The dataset comprised 3,478 eye-level fundus images with a balanced sex distribution, and data were split on a subject-wise basis to avoid information leakage between sets. The fusion model achieved the highest discriminative performance (AUC = 0.861; 95% CI: 0.826-0.895). Single-branch results suggested complementary tendencies, with the macula branch showing higher sensitivity for female classification and the optic disc branch showing higher specificity for male classification. In the fusion model, mean attention weights for the macula (0.408; 95% CI: 0.369-0.446) and optic disc (0.383; 95% CI: 0.347-0.418) were comparable (p = 0.506), and both were significantly higher than those for the vasculature (0.209; 95% CI: 0.184-0.238; p < 0.001). These region-level weights provide a reproducible, quantitative estimate of model reliance across predefined ROIs and complement qualitative explainability methods. Overall, the proposed framework supports more transparent and anatomically interpretable AI for fundus-based sex classification.
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.