ArticleScientific reports2024
Machine learning methods to identify risk factors for corneal graft rejection in keratoconus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Graft Survival and Visual Outcomes in Deep Anterior Lamellar Keratoplasty (DALK): A Narrative Review.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Application in Cornea and External Diseases.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Machine Learning Identifies Predictors of Amniotic Membrane Graft Failure in Neurotrophic Keratitis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Outcomes of cataract surgery in patients with previous corneal transplantation for keratoconus: comparison of PK and DALK.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Classification of Histologically Proven Inflammation in Clinically Inactive Corneal Scars: Implications for Graft Outcomes After Penetrating Keratoplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- AI-driven strategies for advancing corneal cell therapy: a promising frontier.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
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
Machine learning can be used to identify risk factors associated with graft rejection after corneal transplantation for keratoconus. The study included all keratoconus eyes that underwent primary corneal transplantation from 1994 to 2021. Data relating to the recipient, donor, surgery, and postoperative course that might be associated with the occurrence of a graft rejection reaction were compiled. This study used five supervised learning algorithms including artificial neural network, support vector machine, gradient boosting, extra trees classifier, and random survival forests to select the most predictive factors for graft rejection. A total of 1214 consecutive eyes of 985 keratoconus patients were included in the study, and the technique of keratoplasty included penetrating keratoplasty in 574 eyes (47.3%) and deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty in 640 eyes (52.7%). The overall prevalence of first graft rejection was 28.1%. All five models had similar ability in identifying predictive factors for corneal graft rejection. Technique of keratoplasty was associated with an increased risk of graft rejection in all models. Other identified risk factors included patient age, keratoplasty in the fellow eye, donor age, graft endothelial cell density, duration of corticosteroid application, time from keratoplasty to complete suture removal, and suture-associated complications. It is advisable that in the absence of any contraindication, post-transplant keratoconus eyes receive a low dose topical corticosteroid until all sutures are removed.
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.