Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40471629›Full record

ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2025

Fundus Refraction Offset as an Individualized Myopia Biomarker.

Fabian Yii, Ian J C MacCormick, Niall Strang, Miguel O Bernabeu, Tom MacGillivray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Fabian YiiRobert O. Curle Ophthalmology Suite, Institute for Regeneration and Repair, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Ian J C MacCormickRobert O. Curle Ophthalmology Suite, Institute for Regeneration and Repair, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Niall StrangDepartment of Vision Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, United Kingdom.
Miguel O BernabeuCentre for Medical Informatics, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Tom MacGillivrayRobert O. Curle Ophthalmology Suite, Institute for Regeneration and Repair, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: As on-axis metrics, spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and axial length (AL) are limited in capturing individual-level differences in posterior segment anatomy. Objective: To propose a fundus-level metric-fundus refraction offset (FRO)-and investigate its association with ocular parameters derived from optical coherence tomography (OCT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, population-based study used data from 45 180 healthy eyes in the UK Biobank (2009-2010). Fundus photographs from a random subset (70%) were used to train a deep learning model to predict SER, with the goal of developing a model that learned to capture the nonpathological variations in fundus appearance from -15.50 D to 9.25 D. The trained model was applied to the remaining subset (internal unseen set) to derive FRO for each eye. FRO was also computed for an external dataset (the Caledonian cohort, 2023-2024) with enhanced depth imaging OCT and AL data for 152 right eyes. Data were analyzed from July to November 2024. Exposure: FRO, defined as the error in fundus-predicted SER. A more negative FRO indicated a more myopic-looking fundus than typical for an eye with the same SER. Main Outcomes and Measures: The association between FRO and macular thickness (MT) was tested using linear mixed-effects regression in the internal unseen set, controlling for SER, age, sex, and race. In the external dataset, the associations of FRO with choroidal area, choroidal vascularity index (CVI), and MT were examined using linear fixed-effects regression, controlling for SER (and subsequently AL) and other aforementioned covariates. Results: High-quality OCT data were available from 9524 eyes in the internal unseen set and 152 eyes in the external dataset among individuals with a mean (SD) age of 54.5 (8.2) years and 19.3 (3.8) years, respectively. In the internal unseen set, a more negative FRO was independently associated with lower MT (β, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.37-0.90; P < .001). A similar association was observed in the external dataset-whether adjusted for SER (β, 2.45; 95% CI, 0.64-4.26; P = .008) or AL (β, 2.09; 95% CI, 0.28-3.91; P = .02). Additionally, CVI decreased as FRO became more negative-both in the SER-adjusted (β, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.01-0.02; P < .001) and AL-adjusted (β, 0.01, 95% CI, 0.004-0.02; P = .001) analyses. Conclusion and Relevance: In this study, FRO reflected the individual-level mismatch between SER (or AL) and the anatomical severity of ametropia. This may have prognostic relevance for personalized risk prediction of myopia and its complications.

Indexed as

MyopiaRefraction, OcularAdultAgedAxial Length, EyeBiomarkersCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFundus OculiHumansMaleMiddle AgedTomography, Optical CoherenceBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID40471629
PMCPMC12142477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.