ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2026
Leakage-Aware Visit-Level Benchmarking Reveals Representational Overlap in Deep Learning for Bacterial Versus Fungal Keratitis Classification.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to benchmark deep learning for bacterial versus fungal keratitis classification from slit-lamp photographs under a leakage-aware, visit-level framework, and to characterize embedding-space geometry as a potential performance ceiling. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included white-light slit-lamp photographs from 101 patients with culture-confirmed bacterial or fungal keratitis (258 visits; 658 images), using strict patient-disjoint five-fold cross-validation with the clinical visit as the primary prediction unit. Image-level classifiers, multiple instance learning (MIL), and DINOv2-based retrieval were compared under three preprocessing strategies: full-frame, corneal region of interest (ROI), and lesion-centered MedSAM crops. Embedding geometry was analyzed using Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP). Pairwise visit-level model comparisons were performed using patient-cluster paired bootstrap on aligned out-of-fold (OOF) visit-level predictions, and probability calibration was assessed using expected calibration error (ECE) and Brier score. Results: At the image level, the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.691. At the visit level, convolutional neural network (CNN)-based MIL models achieved the highest AUROC (0.677), followed by retrieval-based approaches (0.661). However, MIL models showed larger generalization gaps, whereas DINOv2 lesion-crop retrieval remained stable (-0.014). Lesion-centered preprocessing was the dominant performance determinant within the retrieval paradigm. Embedding analysis revealed extensive class overlap, with 90.9% of fungal visits within the bacterial convex hull. Conclusions: Under leakage-aware, visit-level evaluation, all paradigms converged to modest discrimination, consistent with representational overlap within this single-center cohort. CNN-based MIL achieved higher AUROC but greater overfitting; retrieval-based models provided more stable generalization and superior probability calibration. Whether this ceiling is task-intrinsic or site-specific requires multicenter validation. Translational Relevance: Leakage-aware visit-level benchmarking supports realistic evaluation and calibrated decision support.
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.