ArticlePloS one2025
Benchmarking diffusion models against state-of-the-art architectures for OCT fluid biomarker segmentation.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRetinal diseases, major causes of vision impairment and blindness, are assessed using optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans. Automated report generation for retinal OCT scans, powered by deep learning, can help standardize interpretations and track retinal disease in clinical settings. A key challenge is accurately segmenting retinal disease signatures. This study explores using the diffusion model to segment subretinal fluid (SRF), intraretinal fluid (IRF), and pigment epithelial detachment (PED) in typical clinical settings, comparing their performance to other leading segmentation models.
methodsWe labeled OCT scans and extracted those with specific pathologic retinal features: 269 scans with SRF, 224 scans with IRF, and 114 scans with PED. Three trained reviewers manually segmented these features for downstream analysis. Using manually segmented scans as the ground truth, we trained the diffusion model, Nested U-Net, nnU-Net, TransUNet, and SwinUNet to predict these segmentations. All models were evaluated using 5-fold cross-validation, with performance measured by Dice coefficient, sensitivity, specificity, Pearson correlation coefficient, and R2.
resultsAll models show high similarly with ground truth segmentations in predicting SRF, IRF, and PED, as shown by the Dice coefficient (Diffusion model: 0.81 ± 0.12, 0.66 ± 0.09, 0.75 ± 0.11). The diffusion model has relatively higher sensitivity compared to most other models, while all models display very high specificity. The Pearson correlation coefficient and R2 values show strongly associated pixel quantification of segmented areas for models, with the nnU-Net model performing the strongest overall.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that while diffusion models can comparably segment retinal pathologies using a limited number of manually annotated scans, the nnU-Net model remains the most effective overall for automated OCT analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.