Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38349916›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Deep learning-based correction of cataract-induced influence on macular pigment optical density measurement by autofluorescence spectroscopy.

Akira Obana, Kibo Ote, Yuko Gohto, Hidenao Yamada, Fumio Hashimoto, Shigetoshi Okazaki, Ryo Asaoka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Akira ObanaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seirei Hamamatsu General Hospital, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7930-3618
Kibo OteCentral Research Laboratory, Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Yuko GohtoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seirei Hamamatsu General Hospital, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hidenao YamadaCentral Research Laboratory, Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7091-9053
Fumio HashimotoCentral Research Laboratory, Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2352-0538
Shigetoshi OkazakiCentral Research Laboratory, Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Ryo AsaokaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seirei Hamamatsu General Hospital, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hamamatsu Photonics (Japan) · JPSeirei Hamamatsu General Hospital · JPHamamatsu University School of Medicine · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMeasurements of macular pigment optical density (MPOD) using the autofluorescence spectroscopy yield underestimations of actual values in eyes with cataracts. Previously, we proposed a correction method for this error using deep learning (DL); however, the correction performance was validated through internal cross-validation. This cross-sectional study aimed to validate this approach using an external validation dataset.

methodsMPODs at 0.25°, 0.5°, 1°, and 2° eccentricities and macular pigment optical volume (MPOV) within 9° eccentricity were measured using SPECTRALIS (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) in 197 (training dataset inherited from our previous study) and 157 eyes (validating dataset) before and after cataract surgery. A DL model was trained to predict the corrected value from the pre-operative value using the training dataset, and we measured the discrepancy between the corrected value and the actual postoperative value. Subsequently, the prediction performance was validated using a validation dataset.

resultsUsing the validation dataset, the mean absolute values of errors for MPOD and MPOV corrected using DL ranged from 8.2 to 12.4%, which were lower than values with no correction (P < 0.001, linear mixed model with Tukey's test). The error depended on the autofluorescence image quality used to calculate MPOD. The mean errors in high and moderate quality images ranged from 6.0 to 11.4%, which were lower than those of poor quality images.

conclusionThe usefulness of the DL correction method was validated. Deep learning reduced the error for a relatively good autofluorescence image quality. Poor-quality images were not corrected.

Indexed as

CataractDeep LearningMacular PigmentCross-Sectional StudiesHumansLuteinSpectrum AnalysisZeaxanthinsLuteinMacular PigmentZeaxanthins

Identifiers

PMID38349916
PMCPMC10863874
OpenAlexW4391773854

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.