Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42611835›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Compact vision models match domain-specific foundation models for several retinal imaging classification tasks: A systematic benchmark.

Dávid Isztl, Tahm Spitznagel, Gábor Márk Somfai, Rui Santos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dávid IsztlStadtspital Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, Zurich, Switzerland.
Tahm SpitznagelStadtspital Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3639-8289
Gábor Márk SomfaiStadtspital Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, Zurich, Switzerland.
Rui SantosStadtspital Zurich, Department of Ophthalmology, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6003-9079

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large domain-specific foundation models have been widely adopted for retinal image analysis, yet systematic evidence for their advantage over compact general-purpose architectures remains scarce. We benchmarked nine model configurations spanning 22.8M to 303M parameters (vision transformers, hierarchical Swin Transformers, ConvNeXt, and the domain-specific RETFound models) across four tasks: OCT 8-class disease classification, and three fundus photography tasks (DME severity, glaucoma detection, and DR severity grading). All models were evaluated under identical training conditions, with both pretrained (on natural-domain image datasets) and from-scratch initializations compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. Pretraining improved accuracy by 5.18-18.41 percentage points across all tasks (p < 0.05 throughout), with larger benefits for CFP modalities and harder tasks. Compact hierarchical models (27-29M parameters) matched or exceeded larger architectures on three of four tasks. For instance, the SwinV2-tiny architecture ranked first on OCT, DME, and GL classification. The domain-specific RETFound model (303M) achieved the highest accuracy only on the most challenging task (DR severity grading, where the most severe class is underrepresented at 8% of images), where it outperformed the best compact model by 1.54 percentage points. These results indicate that compact general-purpose models may be sufficient for most retinal classification benchmarks, and that domain-specific foundation models may add higher value mainly for severity grading tasks with skewed class distributions.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedRetinaBenchmarkingGlaucomaHumansTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID42611835
PMCPMC13484977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.