ArticleScientific reports2026
Deep learning-based automated classification of endometrial lesions in IVF patients using hysteroscopic images.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometrial health is a key determinant of female fertility and successful pregnancy outcomes, making the accurate diagnosis of endometrial lesions essential for the success of assisted reproductive technology. While hysteroscopy remains the gold standard for uterine cavity evaluation, interpretation can vary based on clinical expertise. To address this, we developed a deep learning-based clinical decision support system to classify hysteroscopic images from high-resolution (4 K) videos into three categories: normal endometrium, endometrial polyps, and endometritis. Endometritis cases were classified based on hysteroscopic features suggestive of inflammation; no histopathological confirmation was obtained. Utilizing a dataset of 1500 expert-annotated images from 200 clinical videos, we applied transfer learning across four architectures: VGG-16, VGG-19, DenseNet-121, and EfficientNet-B0. Our results show that the models achieved classification accuracies between 85 and 89%, with DenseNet-121 demonstrating superior performance, specifically achieving a sensitivity of 93% and an AUC of 98.8% for polyp detection, alongside a precision of 90% for endometritis. Furthermore, Grad-CAM visualization confirmed that the networks focused on clinically relevant morphological features, enhancing model interpretability. These findings suggest that deep learning may serve as a supportive tool to assist clinicians in hysteroscopic analysis, pending validation on external datasets and with pathologically confirmed labels.
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.