ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Generalized Retinal Artery/Vein Segmentation via Multi-Dataset Fine-Tuning and Pathology Subgroup Analysis.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAutomatic artery/vein (A/V) segmentation in color fundus photography underpins retinal biomarkers such as the arteriolar-to-venular ratio (AVR), yet single-dataset models generalize poorly across institutions and pathologies.
methodsUsing pre-trained Recursive Refinement W-Net (RRWNet) weights as initialization, eight heterogeneous datasets were jointly fine-tuned under a single set of weights for 50 epochs: five A/V-labeled (Fundus-AVSeg, LES-AV, RITE, FIREFLY-Gen, PSEUDO_AV) and three vessel-only (DRIVE, CHASE_DB1, HRF). A vessel-only loss separation strategy applied only the vessel-channel loss to vessel-only datasets, preventing A/V metric dilution; post-processing combined field-of-view masking, connected-component denoising, and morphological refinement, outputting artery, vein, and vessel masks with crossing and junction maps.
resultsLoss separation recovered validation DSC from 0.518 to 0.570 (AUC up to 0.959). On re-inference across four datasets (332 images), the single-weight model attained mean-AV DSC 0.657 ± 0.085 and AUC 0.976 ± 0.016; across normal, AMD, glaucoma, and DR subgroups, performance was statistically indistinguishable (Kruskal-Wallis, all
conclusionsWithin a leakage-aware internal evaluation, the single-weight model produced stable A/V segmentation across the four datasets and across pathology subgroups, indicating preliminary internal consistency rather than proven cross-domain generalization. Because the evaluation reuses data seen during training and no external or patient-level held-out set was used, robustness claims are deferred; leakage-free external validation and patient-level re-evaluation are identified as the essential next steps.
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.