ArticleVision (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Machine Learning-Based Classification of Retinitis Pigmentosa from Color Fundus Images: A Reproducible Benchmark and Screening-Oriented Pipeline.
Article in Vision (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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is a rare inherited retinal disorder in which fundus changes may be subtle and heterogeneous, limiting detection from color fundus images. This study evaluated multiple machine learning architectures for binary-RP versus healthy-control classification, and developed a reproducible pipeline for research-oriented screening support. Three publicly available fundus datasets were combined, including 248 RP images and 1045 healthy controls. An 80/20 train-test split was used, with targeted data augmentation applied only to RP images in the training set to address class imbalance. ConvNeXt-Tiny, ResNet101V2, EfficientNet-B0, a baseline classifier, and custom shallow convolutional neural networks were compared using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, confusion matrices, and ROC/precision-recall analyses. A compact ShallowCNN provided the best sensitivity-performance trade-off. On the fixed image-level test set, Adam with a learning rate of 0.0005 reached 96.51% accuracy, while SGD with a learning rate of 0.001 achieved 98% RP recall, minimizing false negatives. The trained models were exported to ONNX and integrated into a Windows inference tool. The proposed framework provides an open, reproducible benchmark for technical evaluation, although external validation is required before clinical use.
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.