ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Prediction of Post-Treatment Visual Acuity in Age-Related Macular Degeneration Patients With an Interpretable Machine Learning Method.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: We evaluated the features predicting visual acuity (VA) after one year in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) patients. Methods: A total of 527 eyes of 506 patients were included. Machine learning (ML) models were trained to predict VA deterioration beyond a logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution of 1.0 after 1 year based on the sequential addition of multimodal data. BaseM models used clinical data (age, sex, treatment regimen, and VA), SegM models included fluid volumes from optical coherence tomography (OCT) images, and RawM models used probabilities of visual deterioration (hereafter probability) from deep learning classifiers trained on baseline OCT (OCT0) and OCT after three loading doses (OCT3), fluorescein angiography, and indocyanine green angiography. We applied SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) for machine learning model interpretation. Results: The RawM model based on the probability of OCT0 outperformed the SegM model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.95 vs. 0.91). Adding probabilities from OCT3, fluorescein angiography, and indocyanine green angiography to RawM showed minimal performance improvement, highlighting the practicality of using raw OCT0 data for predicting visual outcomes. Applied SHapley Additive exPlanations analysis identified VA after 3 months and OCT3 probability values as the most influential features over quantified fluid segments. Conclusions: Integrating multimodal data to create a visual predictive model yielded accurate, interpretable predictions. This approach allowed the identification of crucial factors for predicting VA in patients with nAMD. Translational Relevance: Interpreting a predictive model for 1-year VA in patients with nAMD from multimodal data allowed us to identify crucial factors for predicting VA.
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.