ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2025
Deep learning-based normative database of anterior chamber dimensions for angle closure assessment: the Singapore Chinese Eye Study.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe lack of context for anterior segment optical coherence tomography (ASOCT) measurements impedes its clinical utility. We established the normative distribution of anterior chamber depth (ACD), area (ACA) and width (ACW) and lens vault (LV), and applied percentile cut-offs to detect primary angle closure disease (PACD; ≥180° posterior trabecular meshwork occluded).
methodsWe included subjects from the Singapore Chinese Eye Study with ASOCT scans. Eyes with ocular surgery or laser procedures, and ocular trauma were excluded. A deep-learning algorithm was used to obtain Visante ASOCT (Carl Zeiss Meditec, USA) measurements. Normative distribution was established using 80% of eyes with open angles. Multivariable logistic regression was performed on 80% open and 80% angle closure eyes. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using 20% open and 20% angle closure eyes.
resultsWe included 2157 eyes (1853 open angles; 304 angle closure) for analysis. ACD, ACA and ACW decreased with age and were smaller in females, and vice versa for LV (all p<0.022). ACD 20th percentile and LV 85th percentile had a balanced accuracy of 84.4% and 84.2% in detecting PACD, respectively. When combined, ACD 20th and LV 85th percentile had 88.68% sensitivity and 88.85% specificity in detecting PACD as compared with a multivariable regression model (ACA, angle opening distance, LV, iris area) with 88.33% sensitivity and 83.75% specificity.
conclusionAnterior chamber parameters varied with age and gender. The ACD 20th and LV 85th percentile values may be used in silos or in combination to detect PACD in the absence of more sophisticated classification algorithms.
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.