ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Predicting Implantable Collamer Lens Vault Using Machine Learning Based on Various Preoperative Biometric Factors.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting vault after implantable collamer lens implantation using intraoperative OCT: establishment and application of models.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Article
- Retrospective Validation of an AI Based Tool for Vault Prediction After Implantable Collamer Lens Surgery for High Myopia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in refractive surgery: progress, challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Predicting age from binarized human oral microbial data combined with an ensemble of classifiers.mSystems · 2025Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Implantable Collamer Lens Vault: A Low Parameter-Dependent Model for Better Surgical Outcomes.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Quantitative analysis of iris-ciliary angle area to optimize ICL selection: a retrospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Exploring Machine Learning Models for Vault Safety in ICL Implantation: A Comparative Analysis of Regression and Classification Models.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Predictive Accuracy of an AI-Based Tool for Postoperative Vault Estimation in Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Shaping the future of myopia with artificial intelligence: Mapping trends and promising directions.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To predict the vault size after Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) V4c implantation using machine learning methods and to compare the predicted vault with the conventional manufacturer's nomogram. Methods: This study included 707 patients (707 eyes) who underwent ICL V4c implantation at the Department of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, from September 2019 to January 2022. Random Forest Regression (RFR), XGBoost, and linear regression (LR) were used to predict the vault size 1 week after ICL V4c implantation. The mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), root mean square error (RMSE), symmetric mean absolute percentage error (SMAPE), and Bland-Altman plot were utilized to compare the prediction performance of these machine learning methods. Results: The dataset was divided into a training set of 180 patients (180 eyes) and a test set of 527 patients (527 eyes). XGBoost had the lowest prediction error, with mean MAE, RMSE, and SMAPE values of 121.70 µm, 148.87 µm, and 19.13%, respectively. The Bland‒Altman plots of RFR and XGBoost showed better prediction consistency than LR. However, XGBoost showed narrower 95% limits of agreement (LoA) than RFR, ranging from -307.12 to 256.59 µm. Conclusions: XGBoost demonstrated better predictive performance than RFR and LR, as it had the lowest prediction error and the narrowest 95% LoA. Machine learning may be applicable for vault prediction, and it might be helpful for reducing the complications and the secondary surgery rate. Translational Relevance: Using the proposed machine learning model, surgeons can consider the postoperative vault to reduce the surgical complications.
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.