Cited by 105Retinal Imaging and AnalysisOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchRetinal Diseases and Treatments

Rotation-Oriented Collaborative Self-Supervised Learning for Retinal Disease Diagnosis

Li, Xiaomeng, Hu, Xiaowei, Qi, Xiaojuan, Yu, Lequan, Zhao, Wei, Heng, Pheng-Ann, Xing, Lei·2021·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

The automatic diagnosis of various conventional ophthalmic diseases from fundus images is important in clinical practice. However, developing such automatic solutions is challenging due to the requirement of a large amount of training data and the expensive annotations for medical images. This paper presents a novel self-supervised learning framework for retinal disease diagnosis to reduce the annotation efforts by learning the visual features from the unlabeled images. To achieve this, we present a rotation-oriented collaborative method that explores rotation-related and rotation-invariant features, which capture discriminative structures from fundus images and also explore the invariant property used for retinal disease classification. We evaluate the proposed method on two public benchmark datasets for retinal disease classification. The experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms other self-supervised feature learning methods (around 4.2% area under the curve (AUC)). With a large amount of unlabeled data available, our method can surpass the supervised baseline for pathologic myopia (PM) and is very close to the supervised baseline for age-related macular degeneration (AMD), showing the potential benefit of our method in clinical practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tmi.2021.3075244

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The innate relationship tasks in combined studies range from augmentation prediction and patch positioning prediction, rotation prediction, and ultrasound video to speech correspondence prediction.

    “The innate relationship tasks range from augmentation prediction and patch positioning prediction69, rotation prediction70, and ultrasound video to speech correspondence prediction53.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, X., Hu, X., Qi, X., Yu, L., Zhao, W., Heng, P.-A., & Xing, L.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Stanford University (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
2021-09
Volume
40
Issue
9
Pages
2284-2294
ISSN
  • 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-254X
OpenAlex
W3153351689
Cited by
105
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 1
FWCI
9.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
retinal disease diagnosis, fundus images, self-supervised learning, rotation-invariant features, unlabeled data, annotation cost reduction, pathologic myopia, age-related macular degeneration, retinal disease classification
MeSH terms
Supervised Machine Learning, Fundus Oculi, Humans, Macular Degeneration, Retina, Retinal Diseases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review