Automated Detection and Diagnosis of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Comprehensive Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss in the world. In the past few years, artificial intelligence (AI) based approaches have been used to detect and grade DR. Early detection enables appropriate treatment and thus prevents vision loss. For this purpose, both fundus and optical coherence tomography (OCT) images are used to image the retina. Next, Deep-learning (DL)-/machine-learning (ML)-based approaches make it possible to extract features from the images and to detect the presence of DR, grade its severity and segment associated lesions. This review covers the literature dealing with AI approaches to DR such as ML and DL in classification and segmentation that have been published in the open literature within six years (2016–2021). In addition, a comprehensive list of available DR datasets is reported. This list was constructed using both the PICO (P-Patient, I-Intervention, C-Control, O-Outcome) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) 2009 search strategies. We summarize a total of 114 published articles which conformed to the scope of the review. In addition, a list of 43 major datasets is presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".