ArticleBiomedical engineering online2022
Identification of ocular refraction based on deep learning algorithm as a novel retinoscopy method.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome-wide association study for refractive error imputed from fundus images via deep learning: a proof-of-concept study.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Fundus Refraction Offset as an Individualized Myopia Biomarker.JAMA ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Optometry: Current and Future Perspectives.Clinical optometry · 2025Review
- Retinoscopes: Past and present.World journal of methodology · 2024Article
- Deep learning-based estimation of axial length using macular optical coherence tomography images.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Deep Imbalanced Regression Model for Predicting Refractive Error from Retinal Photos.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
- Ocular image-based deep learning for predicting refractive error: A systematic review.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe evaluation of refraction is indispensable in ophthalmic clinics, generally requiring a refractor or retinoscopy under cycloplegia. Retinal fundus photographs (RFPs) supply a wealth of information related to the human eye and might provide a promising approach that is more convenient and objective. Here, we aimed to develop and validate a fusion model-based deep learning system (FMDLS) to identify ocular refraction via RFPs and compare with the cycloplegic refraction. In this population-based comparative study, we retrospectively collected 11,973 RFPs from May 1, 2020 to November 20, 2021. The performance of the regression models for sphere and cylinder was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and F1-score were used to evaluate the classification model of the cylinder axis.
resultsOverall, 7873 RFPs were retained for analysis. For sphere and cylinder, the MAE values between the FMDLS and cycloplegic refraction were 0.50 D and 0.31 D, representing an increase of 29.41% and 26.67%, respectively, when compared with the single models. The correlation coefficients (r) were 0.949 and 0.807, respectively. For axis analysis, the accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, and area under the curve value of the classification model were 0.89, 0.941, 0.882, and 0.814, respectively, and the F1-score was 0.88.
conclusionsThe FMDLS successfully identified the ocular refraction in sphere, cylinder, and axis, and showed good agreement with the cycloplegic refraction. The RFPs can provide not only comprehensive fundus information but also the refractive state of the eye, highlighting their potential clinical value.
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.