Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37429862›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Visual field prediction using a deep bidirectional gated recurrent unit network model.

Hwayeong Kim, Jiwoong Lee, Sangwoo Moon, Sangil Kim, Taehyeong Kim, Sang Wook Jin, Jung Lim Kim, Jonghoon Shin, Seung Uk Lee, Geunsoo Jang and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Deep learning models to predict primary open-angle glaucoma.Stat (International Statistical Institute) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

12 authors.

Hwayeong Kim *Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Jiwoong Lee *Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Sangwoo MoonDepartment of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Sangil KimDepartment of Mathematics, Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Taehyeong KimDepartment of Mathematics, Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Sang Wook JinDepartment of Ophthalmology, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Jung Lim KimDepartment of Ophthalmology, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Jonghoon ShinDepartment of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea.
Seung Uk LeeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kosin University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Geunsoo JangNonlinear Dynamics and Mathematical Application Center, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
Yuanmeng HuDepartment of Mathematics, Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Jeong Rye ParkDepartment of Mathematics, Kyungpook National University, 80, Daehak-ro, Buk-gu, Daegu, 41566, Republic of Korea. parkjr@knu.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although deep learning architecture has been used to process sequential data, only a few studies have explored the usefulness of deep learning algorithms to detect glaucoma progression. Here, we proposed a bidirectional gated recurrent unit (Bi-GRU) algorithm to predict visual field loss. In total, 5413 eyes from 3321 patients were included in the training set, whereas 1272 eyes from 1272 patients were included in the test set. Data from five consecutive visual field examinations were used as input; the sixth visual field examinations were compared with predictions by the Bi-GRU. The performance of Bi-GRU was compared with the performances of conventional linear regression (LR) and long short-term memory (LSTM) algorithms. Overall prediction error was significantly lower for Bi-GRU than for LR and LSTM algorithms. In pointwise prediction, Bi-GRU showed the lowest prediction error among the three models in most test locations. Furthermore, Bi-GRU was the least affected model in terms of worsening reliability indices and glaucoma severity. Accurate prediction of visual field loss using the Bi-GRU algorithm may facilitate decision-making regarding the treatment of patients with glaucoma.

Indexed as

GlaucomaVisual FieldsAlgorithmsEyeHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID37429862
PMCPMC10333213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.