ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025
Automated Assessment of Choroidal Mass Dimensions Using Static and Dynamic Ultrasonographic Imaging.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI) model for detecting and measuring choroidal mass dimensions on B-scan ophthalmic ultrasound images. Methods: The study included 1822 still images and 130 cine loops of choroidal masses. For external validation, 180 additional still images were included, along with 374 control images to assess specificity. A two-stage U-Net-based architecture was trained to detect masses and measure dimensions. For cine loops, the algorithm automatically selected the frame with the largest mass cross-sectional area. Results: In the internal subset, detection accuracy was 94.5% with a false-positive rate of 11.7%. For apical height, the mean absolute error (MAE) was 0.42 ± 0.58 mm (R² = 0.87), with 94.2% of cases within 1 mm of expert annotations. For basal diameter, the MAE was 1.02 ± 0.99 mm (R² = 0.74). In the external validation subset, detection accuracy was 83.9%, false-positive rate of 4.2%, and consistent millimeter-level precision for both apical height and basal diameter. Among cine loops, masses were detected in 99.2% of cases, with spatial awareness in 93.1%. Best-frame analysis yielded apical height within 1 mm of the reference in 68.2% of cases (MAE 1.10 ± 1.36 mm) and basal diameter with an MAE of 1.65 ± 1.84 mm. Conclusions: Deep learning provides reproducible, millimeter-level measurements of choroidal mass dimensions from still images and cine loops, supporting its potential use for monitoring of choroidal tumors. Translational Relevance: AI can generate precise measurement of choroidal tumors, enabling clinically actionable monitoring from ophthalmic ultrasound.
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.