Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34398225›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021

Estimating the Severity of Visual Field Damage From Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Measurements With Artificial Intelligence.

Xiaoqin Huang, Jian Sun, Juleke Majoor, Koenraad Arndt Vermeer, Hans Lemij, Tobias Elze, Mengyu Wang, Michael Vincent Boland, Louis Robert Pasquale, Vahid Mohammadzadeh and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Exploring the relationship between 24-2 visual field and widefield optical coherence tomography data across healthy, glaucoma suspect and glaucoma eyes.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Prediction of visual field defects from macular optical coherence tomography in glaucoma using cluster analysis.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Big data for imaging assessment in glaucoma.Taiwan journal of ophthalmology
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Big data in visual field testing for glaucoma.Taiwan journal of ophthalmology
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Xiaoqin HuangDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Jian SunDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Juleke MajoorRotterdam Ophthalmic Institute, Rotterdam Eye Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Koenraad Arndt VermeerRotterdam Ophthalmic Institute, Rotterdam Eye Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hans LemijRotterdam Ophthalmic Institute, Rotterdam Eye Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Tobias ElzeEye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Mengyu WangEye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Michael Vincent BolandDepartment of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA, USA.
Louis Robert PasqualeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Vahid MohammadzadehJules Stein Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Kouros Nouri-MahdaviJules Stein Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Chris JohnsonDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Siamak YousefiDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.

Funding

Relationship between Glaucoma and the Three-Dimensional Optic Nerve Head Related StructureR00EY028631 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI WANG, MENGYU · 2021 to 2023
$741k
Improved Glaucoma Monitoring Using Artificial-Intelligence Enabled DashboardR21EY031725 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI YOUSEFI, SIAMAK · 2020 to 2022
$545k
A hybrid artificial intelligence framework for glaucoma monitoringR21EY030142 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI ELZE, TOBIAS, YOUSEFI, SIAMAK · 2019 to 2020
$499k
Relationship between Glaucoma and the Three-Dimensional Optic Nerve Head Related StructureK99EY028631 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI WANG, MENGYU · 2019 to 2020
$293k
NEI NIH HHS K99 EY028631NEI NIH HHS R00 EY028631NEI NIH HHS R21 EY030142NEI NIH HHS R21 EY031725
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of artificial neural networks (ANN) in estimating the severity of mean deviation (MD) from peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measurements derived from optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods: Models were trained using 1796 pairs of visual field and OCT measurements from 1796 eyes to estimate visual field MD from RNFL data. Multivariable linear regression, random forest regressor, support vector regressor, and 1D convolutional neural network (CNN) models with sectoral RNFL thickness measurements were examined. Three independent subsets consisting of 698, 256, and 691 pairs of visual field and OCT measurements were used to validate the models. Estimation errors were visualized to assess model performance subjectively. Mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), median absolute error, Pearson correlation, and R-squared metrics were used to assess model performance objectively. Results: The MAE and RMSE of the ANN model based on the testing dataset were 4.0 dB (95% confidence interval = 3.8-4.2) and 5.2 dB (95% confidence interval = 5.1-5.4), respectively. The ranges of MAE and RMSE of the ANN model on independent datasets were 3.3-5.9 dB and 4.4-8.4 dB, respectively. Conclusions: The proposed ANN model estimated MD from RNFL measurements better than multivariable linear regression model, random forest, support vector regressor, and 1-D CNN models. The model was generalizable to independent data from different centers and varying races. Translational Relevance: Successful development of ANN models may assist clinicians in assessing visual function in glaucoma based on objective OCT measures with less dependence on subjective visual field tests.

Indexed as

Nerve FibersVisual FieldsArtificial IntelligenceRetinal Ganglion CellsVisual Field Tests

Identifiers

PMID34398225
PMCPMC8375007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.