Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38727695›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024

Keratoconus Progression Determined at the First Visit: A Deep Learning Approach With Fusion of Imaging and Numerical Clinical Data.

Lennart M Hartmann, Denna S Langhans, Veronika Eggarter, Tim J Freisenich, Anna Hillenmayer, Susanna F König, Efstathios Vounotrypidis, Armin Wolf, Christian M Wertheimer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial intelligence in corneal diseases: A narrative review.Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association · 2024
    Review
  8. The Association of a Single Nucleotide Variant inMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024
    Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Lennart M HartmannDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Denna S LanghansDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Veronika EggarterDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Tim J FreisenichDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Anna HillenmayerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Susanna F KönigDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Efstathios VounotrypidisDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Armin WolfDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Christian M WertheimerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Multiple clinical visits are necessary to determine progression of keratoconus before offering corneal cross-linking. The purpose of this study was to develop a neural network that can potentially predict progression during the initial visit using tomography images and other clinical risk factors. Methods: The neural network's development depended on data from 570 keratoconus eyes. During the initial visit, numerical risk factors and posterior elevation maps from Scheimpflug imaging were collected. Increase of steepest keratometry of 1 diopter during follow-up was used as the progression criterion. The data were partitioned into training, validation, and test sets. The first two were used for training, and the latter for performance statistics. The impact of individual risk factors and images was assessed using ablation studies and class activation maps. Results: The most accurate prediction of progression during the initial visit was obtained by using a combination of MobileNet and a multilayer perceptron with an accuracy of 0.83. Using numerical risk factors alone resulted in an accuracy of 0.82. The use of only images had an accuracy of 0.77. The most influential risk factors in the ablation study were age and posterior elevation. The greatest activation in the class activation maps was seen at the highest posterior elevation where there was significant deviation from the best fit sphere. Conclusions: The neural network has exhibited good performance in predicting potential future progression during the initial visit. Translational Relevance: The developed neural network could be of clinical significance for keratoconus patients by identifying individuals at risk of progression.

Indexed as

Corneal TopographyDeep LearningDisease ProgressionKeratoconusAdolescentAdultCorneaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerRisk FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38727695
PMCPMC11104256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.