Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40328135›Full record

ArticleJournal of optometry

Deep learning-based segmentation of OCT images for choroidal thickness.

Raman Prasad Sah, Nimesh B Patel, Hope M Queener, Pavan K Narra, Lisa A Ostrin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Acute Ocular Effects of Violet and Red Light Exposure in Young Adults.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  3. Myopia Prevalence, Ocular Metrics and Visual Activity in United States Optometry Students.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Interaction Between Near Work and Narrowband Light on Choroidal Thickness.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Raman Prasad SahUniversity of Houston College of Optometry, 4401 MLK Blvd, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
Nimesh B PatelUniversity of Houston College of Optometry, 4401 MLK Blvd, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
Hope M QueenerUniversity of Houston College of Optometry, 4401 MLK Blvd, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
Pavan K NarraUniversity of Houston College of Optometry, 4401 MLK Blvd, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
Lisa A OstrinUniversity of Houston College of Optometry, 4401 MLK Blvd, Houston, TX 77204, USA. Electronic address: Lostrin@central.uh.edu.

Funding

Light, near work, and ocular remodeling and during emmetropization and myopia development in childrenR01EY030193 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON · PI Lisa A Ostrin, Jason Porter · 2019 to 2026
$2.7M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY030193
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop and validate a custom deep learning-based automated segmentation for choroidal thickness of optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans.

methodsAn in-house automated algorithm was trained on a Deeplabv3+ network, based on ResNet50, using a training set of 10,798 manually segmented OCT scans (accuracy 99.25% and loss 0.0229). A test set of 130 unique scans was segmented using manual and in-house automated methods. For manual segmentation, the choroid-sclera border was delineated by the user. For in-house automated segmentation, all borders were automatically detected by the program and manually inspected. Bland-Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Deming regression compared the central 1-mm diameter and 3-mm and 6-mm annuli for the two methods. The in-house method was also compared with an open-source algorithm for the test set of 130 scans.

resultsMean choroidal thicknesses obtained with manual and in-house automated methods were not significantly different for the three regions (P > 0.05 for all). The fixed bias between methods ranged from -2.41 to 3.49 µm. Proportional bias ranged from -0.04 to -0.12 (P < 0.05 for all). The two methods demonstrated excellent agreement across regions (ICC: 0.96 to 0.98, P < 0.001 for all). The open-source automated method consistently resulted in thinner choroidal thickness compared to manual and in-house automated methods.

conclusionsCustom in-house deep learning automated choroid segmentation demonstrated excellent agreement and strong positive linear relationship with manual segmentation. The automated approach holds distinct advantages for estimating choroidal thickness, being more objective and efficient than the manual approach.

Indexed as

ChoroidDeep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedTomography, Optical CoherenceAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsAutomated segmentationChoroidal thicknessDeep learningNeural networkOptical coherence tomography

Identifiers

PMID40328135
PMCPMC12138193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.