ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Development and Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms to Determine Visual Field Progression.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Labeling matters: A multicenter machine learning study on visual field progression in Glaucoma.PloS one · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Glaucoma: Advances in Diagnosis, Progression Forecasting, and Surgical Outcome Prediction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Predicting progressive vision loss in glaucoma patients using functional principal component analysis and electronic health records.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Derived Baseline Visual Field Patterns Predict Future Glaucoma Onset in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Predicting glaucoma progression using deep learning framework guided by generative algorithm.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Novel Machine-Learning Based Framework Using Electroretinography Data for the Detection of Early-Stage Glaucoma.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Application of artificial intelligence in glaucoma care: An updated review.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
- Use of artificial intelligence in forecasting glaucoma progression.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To develop and test machine learning classifiers (MLCs) for determining visual field progression. Methods: In total, 90,713 visual fields from 13,156 eyes were included. Six different progression algorithms (linear regression of mean deviation, linear regression of the visual field index, Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study algorithm, Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study algorithm, pointwise linear regression [PLR], and permutation of PLR) were applied to classify each eye as progressing or stable. Six MLCs were applied (logistic regression, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, support vector classifier, convolutional neural network, fully connected neural network) using a training and testing set. For MLC input, visual fields for a given eye were divided into the first and second half and each location averaged over time within each half. Each algorithm was tested for accuracy, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and class bias with a subset of visual fields labeled by a panel of three experts from 161 eyes. Results: MLCs had similar performance metrics as some of the conventional algorithms and ranged from 87% to 91% accurate with sensitivity ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 and specificity from 0.92 to 0.96. All conventional algorithms showed significant class bias, meaning each individual algorithm was more likely to grade uncertain cases as either progressing or stable (P ≤ 0.01). Conversely, all MLCs were balanced, meaning they were equally likely to grade uncertain cases as either progressing or stable (P ≥ 0.08). Conclusions: MLCs showed a moderate to high level of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity and were more balanced than conventional algorithms. Translational Relevance: MLCs may help to determine visual field progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.