ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2025
Supervised machine learning statistical models for visual outcome prediction in macular hole surgery: a single-surgeon, standardized surgery study.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Vitreoretinal Surgery: A Systematic Review of Current Applications and Future Directions.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the predictive accuracy of various machine learning (ML) statistical models in forecasting postoperative visual acuity (VA) outcomes following macular hole (MH) surgery using preoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT) parameters.
methodsThis retrospective study included 158 eyes (151 patients) with full-thickness MHs treated between 2017 and 2023 by the same surgeon and using the same intraoperative surgical technique. Data from electronic medical records and OCT scans were extracted, with OCT-derived qualitative and quantitative MH characteristics recorded. Six supervised ML models-ANCOVA, Random Forest (RF) regression, K-Nearest Neighbor, Support Vector Machine, Extreme Gradient Boosting, and Lasso regression-were trained using an 80:20 training-to-testing split. Model performance was evaluated on an independent testing dataset using the XLSTAT software. In total, the ML statistical models were trained and tested on 14,652 OCT data points from 1332 OCT images.
resultsOverall, 91% achieved MH closure post-surgery, with a median VA gain of -0.3 logMAR units. The RF regression model outperformed other ML models, achieving the lowest mean square error (MSE = 0.038) on internal validation. The most significant predictors of VA were postoperative MH closure status (variable importance = 43.078) and MH area index (21.328). The model accurately predicted the post-operative VA within 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 logMAR units in 61%, 78%, and 87% of OCT images, respectively.
conclusionThe RF regression model demonstrated superior predictive accuracy for forecasting postoperative VA, suggesting ML-driven approaches may improve surgical planning and patient counselling by providing reliable insights into expected visual outcomes based on pre-operative OCT features. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.