Detection of oedema on optical coherence tomography images using deep learning model trained on noisy clinical data
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: To meet the demands imposed by the continuing growth of the Age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) patient population, automation of follow‐ups by detecting retinal oedema using deep learning might be a viable approach. However, preparing and labelling data for training is time consuming. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of training a convolutional neural network (CNN) to accurately detect retinal oedema on optical coherence tomography (OCT) images of AMD patients with labels derived directly from clinical treatment decisions, without extensive preprocessing or relabelling. Methods: A total of 50 439 OCT images with associated treatment information were retrieved from databases at the Department of Ophthalmology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark between 01.06.2007 and 01.06.2018. A CNN was trained on the retrieved data with the recorded treatment decisions as labels and validated on a subset of the data relabelled by three ophthalmologists to denote presence of oedema. Results: Moderate inter‐grader agreement on presence of oedema in the relabelled data was found (76.4%). Despite different training and validation labels, the CNN performed on par with inter‐grader agreement in detecting oedema on OCT images (AUC 0.97, accuracy 90.9%) and previously published models based on relabelled datasets. Conclusion: The level of performance shown by the current model might make it valuable in detecting disease activity in automated AMD patient follow‐up systems. Our approach demonstrates that high accuracy is not necessarily constrained by incongruent training and validation labels. These results might encourage the use of existing clinical databases for development of deep learning based algorithms without labour‐intensive preprocessing in the future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Label noise can stem from training on proxy labels, for instance, deriving labels from treatment prescriptions.
“Label noise can stem from training on proxy labels, for instance, deriving labels from treatment prescriptions34.”
From A scoping review of robustness concepts for machine learning in healthcare (2025) · cites this paper as [34]
Cites
Verbraak, F. D., Abramoff, M. D., Bausch, G. C. F., Klaver, C., Nijpels, G., Schlingemann, R. O., & van der Heijden, A. A. (2019) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc18-0148 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A scoping review of robustness concepts for machine learning in healthcare
Balendran, A., Beji, C., Bouvier, F., Khalifa, O., Evgeniou, T., Ravaud, P., & Porcher, R. (2025) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01420-1 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“Label noise can stem from training on proxy labels, for instance, derivinglabelsfromtreatmentprescriptions 34 .”
- Authors
- Potapenko, I., Kristensen, M., Thiesson, B., Ilginis, T., Lykke Sørensen, T., Nouri Hajari, J., Fuchs, J., Hamann, S., & la Cour, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Enversion A/S Aarhus Denmark
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Rigshospitalet (DK)
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark
- Department of Ophthalmology Rigshospitalet Copenhagen Denmark
- Corresponding author
- Potapenko, Ivan
- Venue
- Acta Ophthalmologica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2021-05-15
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 103-110
- ISSN
- 0001-639X (ISSN-L)
- 1755-375X
- 1755-3768
- OpenAlex
- W3162287876
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 1.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Acta Ophthalmologica (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Helsefonden (20‐B‐0099)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Keywords
- age-related macular degeneration, optical coherence tomography, convolutional neural networks, noisy training data, disease activity monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Ophthalmologists, Deep Learning, Algorithms, Education, Medical, Graduate, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Macula Lutea, Macular Degeneration, Macular Edema, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, ROC Curve, Tomography, Optical Coherence
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