ReviewGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026
Artificial intelligence applications in inherited retinal dystrophies.
Review in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regulatory mechanisms and therapeutic potential of N6-methyladenosine modification in retinal diseases (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2026Review
- Genetic Testing in Inherited Retinal Disease: Current Strategies and Future Directions.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeInherited retinal dystrophies (IRDs) are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by genotypic and phenotypic variability and are among the leading causes of blindness in the working-age population in developed countries. Despite advancements in genetic testing, obtaining a molecular diagnosis remains a lengthy and challenging process due to limited resources and high costs. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers promising solutions to streamline diagnostic pathways and improve clinical outcomes.
methodsWe reviewed current literature on AI-driven approaches in IRDs.
resultsAI models have demonstrated potential in predicting disease-causing variants, distinguishing phenotypically similar IRDs, and segmenting retinal layers. However, their routine clinical adoption remains limited. Efforts are ongoing to lower genetic testing costs, reduce diagnostic delays, and enhance molecular diagnostic yield. Future applications may include genetic counselling, prediction of IRD progression, evaluation of novel mutation pathogenicity, identification of gene therapy candidates, and prediction of personalized outcomes post-treatment. Barriers to widespread AI adoption include a lack of standardized nomenclature, ethnic and regional variations, inconsistent multimodal imaging quality, data ownership concerns, clinical safety, cybersecurity, and the opaque nature of AI decision-making, known as the "black-box" problem.
conclusionsAI models have shown promise in diagnosing IRDs, predicting causative genes, and segmenting retinal layers. While AI has the potential to revolutionize IRD diagnosis and management, significant challenges must be addressed. Continued research and collaboration are crucial to overcoming these barriers and unlocking AI's full potential in IRDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41191063What 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.