ArticleOphthalmology science
Automated Recognition of Visual Acuity Measurements in Ophthalmology Clinical Notes Using Deep Learning.
Article in Ophthalmology science. 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.
- Identification of Risk Factors for Glaucoma Progression in Free-Text Clinical Notes Using a Local Large Language Model.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking GPT-5, LLaMA, and Mistral for Clinical Named Entity Recognition in Ophthalmology Progress Notes.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Leveraging Large Language Models with Sequential Prompting to Extract Eye Examination Findings from Free-Text Ophthalmology Notes.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Zero-shot LLM-based visual acuity extraction: a pilot study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Toward Clinical Generative AI: Conceptual Framework.JMIR AI · 2024Article
- Addressing Generalizability in Clinical Named Entity Recognition: Federated Learning or Large Language Models?: A Case Study on Visual Acuity Extraction from US and UK Eye Institutes.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models for Named Entity Recognition in Ophthalmology Clinical Free-Text Notes.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
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
Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) is a critical component of the eye examination but is often only documented in electronic health records (EHRs) as unstructured free-text notes, making it challenging to use in research. This study aimed to improve on existing rule-based algorithms by developing and evaluating deep learning models to perform named entity recognition of different types of VA measurements and their lateralities from free-text ophthalmology notes: VA for each of the right and left eyes, with and without glasses correction, and with and without pinhole. Design: Cross-sectional study. Subjects: A total of 319 756 clinical notes with documented VA measurements from approximately 90 000 patients were included. Methods: The notes were split into train, validation, and test sets. Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) models were fine-tuned to identify VA measurements from the progress notes and included BERT models pretrained on biomedical literature (BioBERT), critical care EHR notes (ClinicalBERT), both (BlueBERT), and a lighter version of BERT with 40% fewer parameters (DistilBERT). A baseline rule-based algorithm was created to recognize the same VA entities to compare against BERT models. Main Outcome Measures: Model performance was evaluated on a held-out test set using microaveraged precision, recall, and F1 score for all entities. Results: On the human-annotated subset, BlueBERT achieved the best microaveraged F1 score (F1 = 0.92), followed by ClinicalBERT (F1 = 0.91), DistilBERT (F1 = 0.90), BioBERT (F1 = 0.84), and the baseline model (F1 = 0.83). Common errors included labeling VA in sections outside of the examination portion of the note, difficulties labeling current VA alongside a series of past VAs, and missing nonnumeric VAs. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that deep learning models are capable of identifying VA measurements from free-text ophthalmology notes with high precision and recall, achieving significant performance improvements over a rule-based algorithm. The ability to recognize VA from free-text notes would enable a more detailed characterization of ophthalmology patient cohorts and enhance the development of models to predict ophthalmology outcomes. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.