ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2023
Predicting 60-4 visual field tests using 3D facial reconstruction.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2023. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite, the potential clinical utility of 60-4 visual fields, they are not frequently used in clinical practice partly, due to the purported impact of facial contour on field defects. The purpose of this study was to design and test an artificial intelligence-driven platform to predict facial structure-dependent visual field defects on 60-4 visual field tests.
methodsSubjects with no ocular pathology were included. Participants were subject to optical coherence tomography, 60-4 Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm visual field tests and photography. The predicted visual field was compared with observed 60-4 visual field results in subjects. Average and point-specific sensitivity, specificity, precision, negative predictive value, accuracy, and F1-scores were primary outcome measures.
results30 healthy were enrolled. Three-dimensional facial reconstruction using a convolution neural network (CNN) was able to predict facial contour-dependent 60-4 visual field defects in 30 subjects without ocular pathology. Overall model accuracy was 97%±3% and 96%±3% and the F1-score, dependent on precision and sensitivity, was 58%±19% and 55%±15% for the right eye and left eye, respectively. Spatial-dependent model performance was observed with increased sensitivity and precision within the far inferior nasal field reflected by an average F1-score of 76%±20% and 70%±29% for the right eye and left eye, respectively.
conclusionsThis pilot study reports the development of a CNN-enhanced platform capable of predicting 60-4 visual field defects in healthy controls based on facial contour. Further study with this platform may enhance understanding of the influence of facial contour on 60-4 visual field testing.
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.