ArticleJournal of global health2025
Rapid and accurate prediction of cycloplegic refraction in Chinese children: development and validation of machine learning models.
Article in Journal of global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Cycloplegic Refraction Using the Eyerobo Vision Screener: Design-A Cross-Sectional Comparative Device Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Uncorrected refractive error affects approximately 19 million children globally, resulting in preventable vision loss. However, cycloplegic refraction, the gold standard for assessment, remains largely inaccessible in low-resource settings. We aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) prediction models based on non-cycloplegic results to estimate the cycloplegic spherical equivalent (cSE). Methods: The internal dataset comprised refractive measurements and ocular biometric parameters collected from 3035 children's eyes at the Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University, the research team's primary hospital. The external validation sets consisted of 160 and 120 eyes, respectively, from two different centres. Based on ocular biometric parameters and non-cycloplegic spherical equivalent, we employed single and stacked ML models to predict cSE. We used regression metrics and agreement analysis between the predicted spherical equivalent (pSE) and cSE to assess prediction performances. We also created segmented models based on age and refractive groups. The generalisation performance of the models was assessed using evaluation metrics as well as correlation and agreement analyses in the external validations. Results: The stacked overall model outperformed single-algorithm models, achieving an R Conclusions: The ML models enable cSE prediction based on non-cycloplegic refraction data and ocular biometric parameters, providing a fast, practical method for estimating refractive error. Multicenter validation and targeted oversampling of rare refractive subgroups are required, however, before robust clinical implementation of the models.
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.