ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025
Explainable Deep Learning for Glaucomatous Visual Field Prediction: Artifact Correction Enhances Transformer Models.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal Deep Learning for Humphrey 24-2 Visual Field Prediction: Evaluating the Contribution of Fellow-Eye Information in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of Signal-Strength Filtering on 3D Convolutional Neural Network-Based Visual Field Estimation From Macular OCT.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Predicting HFA 30-2 Visual Fields with Deep Learning from Multimodal OCT-Fundus Feature Fusion and Structure-Function Discordance Analysis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Augmented Decisions: AI-Enhanced Accuracy in Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment.Journal of clinical 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop a deep learning approach that restores artifact-laden optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans and predicts functional loss on the 24-2 Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) test. Methods: This cross-sectional, retrospective study used 1674 visual field (VF)-OCT pairs from 951 eyes for training and 429 pairs from 345 eyes for testing. Peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness map artifacts were corrected using a generative diffusion model. Three convolutional neural networks and 2 transformer-based models were trained on original and artifact-corrected datasets to estimate 54 sensitivity thresholds of the 24-2 HVF test. Results: Predictive performances were calculated using root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE), with explainability evaluated through GradCAM, attention maps, and dimensionality reduction techniques. The Distillation with No Labels (DINO) Vision Transformers (ViT) trained on artifact-corrected datasets achieved the highest accuracy (RMSE, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.44, 95% CI = 4.07, 4.82 decibel [dB], MAE = 3.46, 95% CI = 3.14, 3.79 dB), and the greatest interpretability, showing improvements of 0.15 dB in global RMSE and MAE (P < 0.05) compared to the performance on original maps. Feature maps and visualization tools indicate that artifacts compromise DINO-ViT's predictive ability but improve with artifact correction. Conclusions: Combining self-supervised ViTs with generative artifact correction enhances the correlation between glaucomatous structures and functions. Translational Relevance: Our approach offers a comprehensive tool for glaucoma management, facilitates the exploration of structure-function correlations in research, and underscores the importance of addressing artifacts in the clinical interpretation of OCT.
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.