MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411857942 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-04648-3

A deep learning model for diagnosis of inherited retinal diseases

2025· article· en· W4411857942 on OpenAlexaff
Freshteh Jafarbeglou, Hamid Ahmadieh, Farahnaz Soleimani, Ali Karimi, Narsis Daftarian, Sahba Fekri, Tahmineh Motevasseli, Morteza Naderan, Babak Kamali Doust Azad, Abbas Sheikhtaheri, Farid Khorrami, Hemn Baghban Jaldian, Kia Bayat, Tahereh Sabbaghi, Kourosh Sheibani, Hadi Ghattan Kashani, Masoud Shariat Panahi, Hamideh Sabbaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsComputer scienceRetinalArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyBioinformaticsMedicineOptometryOphthalmologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To evaluate the performance of a multi-input deep learning (DL) model in detecting two common inherited retinal diseases (IRDs), i.e. retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and Stargardt disease (STGD), and differentiating them from healthy eyes. This cross-sectional study includes 391 cases, consisting of 158 subjects with RP, 62 patients with STGD, and 171 healthy individuals. The image dataset is publicly available at http://en.riovs.sbmu.ac.ir/Access-to-Inherited-Retinal-Diseases-Image-Bank . Separate networks using the same hyperparameters were trained and tested on the dataset. Two single-input MobileNetV2 networks were employed for color fundus photography (CFP) and infrared (IR) images, and a multi-input MobileNetV2 network was applied using both imaging modalities simultaneously. The single-input MobileNetV2 achieved 94.44% diagnostic accuracy using CFP, and 94.44% accuracy employing IR images, respectively. The multi-input MobileNetV2 network outperformed both single-input networks with an accuracy of 96.3%. The impact of single-input and multi-input architectures was further evaluated on state-of-the-art neural network models and machine learning algorithms. The deep learning networks utilized in this study achieved high performance for detection of IRDs. Application of a multi-input network employing both CFP and IR image inputs improves the overall performance of the model and its diagnostic accuracy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207