ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology
Deep Learning Algorithm for Keratoconus Detection from Tomographic Maps and Corneal Biomechanics: A Diagnostic Study.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Early Detection of Keratoconus: Diagnostic Advances and Their Impact on Visual Outcomes: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- A Deep Learning-Based Graphical User Interface for Predicting Corneal Ectasia Scores from Raw Optical Coherence Tomography Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Derived Biomechanical Index for Early Corneal Ectasia Detection: Advancing Beyond Tomography.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Diagnosis of Corneal Condition by Using Raw Optical Coherence Tomography Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based keratoconus detection from Scheimpflug images.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) approach for differentiating between normal cornea, subclinical, and keratoconus (KC) using tomographic maps from Pentacam (Oculus) and corneal biomechanics from Corvis ST (Oculus). Methods: A total of 1,668 tomographic (769 patients) and 611 biomechanical (307 patients) images from the Chula Refractive Surgery Center, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital were included. The sample size was divided into the Pentacam and combined Pentacam-Corvis groups. Different convolutional neural network approaches were used to enhance the KC and subclinical KC detection performance. Results: AI model 1, which obtained refractive maps from Pentacam, achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.938 and accuracy of 0.947 (sensitivity, 90.8% and specificity, 96.9%). AI model 2, which added dynamic corneal response and the Vinciguerra screening report from Corvis ST to AI Model 1, achieved an AUC of 0.985 and accuracy of 0.956 (sensitivity, 93.0% and specificity, 94.3%). AI model 3, which added the corneal biomechanical index to AI Model 2, reached an AUC of 0.991 and accuracy of 0.956 (sensitivity, 93.0% and specificity, 94.3%). Conclusions: Our study showed that AI models using either anterior corneal curvature alone or combined with corneal biomechanics could help classify normal and keratoconic corneas, which would make diagnosis more accurate and would be helpful in decision-making for the treatment.
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.