Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39120886›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024

Machine Learning Models for Predicting Cycloplegic Refractive Error and Myopia Status Based on Non-Cycloplegic Data in Chinese Students.

Bole Ying, Rajat S Chandra, Jianyong Wang, Hongguang Cui, Julius T Oatts

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 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The application of artificial intelligence in myopia prediction for children and adolescents: a review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  5. Artificial intelligence in pediatric myopia - a narrative review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Bole YingLower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, USA.
Rajat S ChandraUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jianyong WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Hongguang CuiDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Julius T OattsDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

Community-based amblyopia screening using a novel deviceK23EY034893 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Julius Oatts · 2023 to 2026
$1.0M
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY034893
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To develop and validate machine learning (ML) models for predicting cycloplegic refractive error and myopia status using noncycloplegic refractive error and biometric data. Methods: Cross-sectional study of children aged five to 18 years who underwent biometry and autorefraction before and after cycloplegia. Myopia was defined as cycloplegic spherical equivalent refraction (SER) ≤-0.5 Diopter (D). Models were evaluated for predicting SER using R2 and mean absolute error (MAE) and myopia status using area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). Best-performing models were further evaluated using sensitivity/specificity and comparison of observed versus predicted myopia prevalence rate overall and in each age group. Independent data sets were used for training (n = 1938) and validation (n = 1476). Results: In the validation dataset, ML models predicted cycloplegic SER with high R2 (0.913-0.935) and low MAE (0.393-0.480 D). The AUC for predicting myopia was high (0.984-0.987). The best-performing model for SER (XGBoost) had high sensitivity and specificity (91.1% and 97.2%). Random forest (RF), the best-performing model for myopia, had high sensitivity and specificity (92.2% and 96.9%). Within each age group, difference between predicted and actual myopia prevalence was within 4%. Conclusions: Using noncycloplegic refractive error and ocular biometric data, ML models performed well for predicting cycloplegic SER and myopia status. When measuring cycloplegic SER is not feasible, ML may provide a useful tool for estimating cycloplegic SER and myopia prevalence rate in epidemiological studies. Translational Relevance: Using ML to predict cycloplegic refraction based on noncycloplegic data is a powerful tool for large, population-based studies of refractive error.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMydriaticsMyopiaRefraction, OcularAdolescentArea Under CurveBiometryChildChild, PreschoolChinaCross-Sectional StudiesEast Asian PeopleFemaleHumansMalePrevalenceMydriatics

Identifiers

PMID39120886
PMCPMC11318358

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.