Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37418053›Full record

SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2024

Comparison of different corneal imaging modalities using artificial intelligence for diagnosis of keratoconus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hassan Hashemi, Farideh Doroodgar, Sana Niazi, Mehdi Khabazkhoob, Zahra Heidari

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Keratoconus: imaging modalities and management.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2024
    Review
  15. Comprehensive evaluation of oculus pentacam in subclinical keratoconus and clinical keratoconus patients at different stages.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
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

5 authors.

Hassan HashemiNoor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
Farideh DoroodgarTranslational Ophthalmology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sana NiaziResearch Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mehdi KhabazkhoobDepartment of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Zahra HeidariDepartment of Ophthalmology, Bu-Ali Sina Hospital, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran. zahra.heidari77@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1838-9408

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis review was designed to compare different corneal imaging modalities using artificial intelligence (AI) for the diagnosis of keratoconus (KCN), subclinical KCN (SKCN), and forme fruste KCN (FFKCN).

methodsA comprehensive systematic search was conducted in scientific databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar based on the PRISMA statement. Two independent reviewers assessed all potential publications on AI and KCN up to March 2022. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) 11-item checklist was used to evaluate the validity of the studies. Eligible articles were categorized into three groups (KCN, SKCN, and FFKCN) and included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of accuracy (PEA) was calculated for all selected articles.

resultsThe initial search yielded 575 relevant publications, of which 36 met the CASP quality criteria and were included in the analysis. Qualitative assessment showed that Scheimpflug and Placido combined with biomechanical and wavefront evaluations improved KCN detection (PEA, 99.2, and 99.0, respectively). The Scheimpflug system (92.25 PEA, 95% CI, 94.76-97.51) and a combination of Scheimpflug and Placido (96.44 PEA, 95% CI, 93.13-98.19) had the highest diagnostic accuracy for the detection of SKCN and FFKCN, respectively. The meta-analysis outcomes showed no significant difference between the CASP score and accuracy of the publications (all P > 0.05).

conclusionsSimultaneous Scheimpflug and Placido corneal imaging methods provide high diagnostic accuracy for early detection of keratoconus. The use of AI models improves the discrimination of keratoconic eyes from normal corneas.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCorneaCorneal TopographyKeratoconusHumansReproducibility of ResultsArtificial intelligenceCorneal imagingDeep learningDiagnosisKeratoconusMachine learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.