ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Intelligent Staging Performance of Diabetic Retinopathy Based on Fundus Fluorescein Angiography Images with Different Angiographic Phases.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) is the gold standard for diabetic retinopathy (DR) staging, yet whether angiographic phase affects deep learning performance remains unknown. Using 7508 FFA images from 863 eyes, stratified into venous, recirculation, and late phases, we developed Swin Transformer- and ConvNeXt-based DR staging models under the International five-grade and Chinese six-grade classification systems. Multiclass and binary (NPDR vs. PDR) classification tasks were evaluated. This study provides the first systematic quantification of angiographic phase effects on FFA-based DR staging. Phase-related performance was analyzed using generalized linear mixed-effects models with beta regression. ConvNeXt generally outperformed Swin Transformer, particularly in multiclass classification. Across all experimental settings, performance showed a consistent numerical decline from the venous to the late phase. Under the International five-grade system, ConvNeXt accuracy declined from 86.67% to 81.87%; however, Bonferroni-adjusted comparisons revealed no statistically significant phase-related differences (all adjusted
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.