Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40813977›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Quantifying optimal inner limiting membrane peeling in macular hole surgery: a machine learning framework for predictive modeling and schematic visualization.

Xiang Zhang, Hongjie Ma, Song Lin, Ledong Zhao, Lu Chen, Zetong Nie, Zhaoxiong Wang, Chang Liu, Xiaorong Li, Wenbo Li and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Xiang Zhang *Department of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Hongjie Ma *School of Energy and Electronic Engineering, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
Song LinDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Ledong ZhaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Lu ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Zetong NieDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Zhaoxiong WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Chang LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Xiaorong LiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China.
Wenbo LiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China. wenboli80@163.com.ORCID 0009-0002-9948-0288
Bojie HuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye Institute, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Eye Institute, Tianjin, China. bhu07@tmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-7840-8290

Funding

The Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City No. 20JCZXJC00040The Science & Technology Development Fund of Tianjin Education Commission for Higher Education No. 2022ZD058
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeInternal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling in macular hole (MH) surgery is critical but challenging, and current practices lack standardized tools for quantifying and visualizing optimal peeling dimensions.This study aimed to develop a machine learning framework to recommend surgeon-specific ILM peeling radius during macular hole surgery, integrating predictive modeling with schematic visualization to guide operative planning.

methodsThis retrospective study analyzed data from 95 patients with idiopathic MH who underwent vitrectomy with ILM peeling. Preoperative and postoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT) images were used to measure key MH parameters, including minimum diameter (MIN), base width (BASE), temporal length (T), nasal length (N), and height (H). The dataset was preprocessed by addressing missing values and applying Z-score normalization. 10 regression models were trained and evaluated using an 80 - 20 train-test split. Model performance was assessed using root mean squared error (RMSE), mean squared error (MSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and the coefficient of determination (R²). A graphical user interface (GUI) was developed to generate ILM peeling schematic diagrams from OCT data.

resultsThe Ridge Regression model demonstrated the best performance, with an RMSE of 0.0320, MSE of 0.0010, MAE of 0.0209, and R² of 0.9427. The generated ILM peeling schematic diagrams provided clear visual representations, aiding surgical planning and education.

conclusionThe Ridge Regression model effectively predicts the optimal ILM peeling radius. The integration of schematic diagram generation enhances surgical planning and provides valuable educational resources, highlighting the potential of machine learning and visualization tools in improving MH surgery outcomes.

Indexed as

Machine LearningRetinal PerforationsVitrectomyAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTomography, Optical CoherenceInner limiting membraneMachine learningMacular holeOptical coherence tomographyRidge regression model

Identifiers

PMID40813977
PMCPMC12355892

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.