Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42005908›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science2026

Latent Supervision: A Method for Improved Performance and Calibration of Machine Learning Classification Models in Ophthalmology.

Hady Yazbeck, Jad Assaf, Tom M Lietman, Jeremy D Keenan, John Jackson, Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer, J Peter Campbell, Xubo Song, Travis K Redd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

9 authors.

Hady YazbeckCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Jad AssafCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Tom M LietmanFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Jeremy D KeenanFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
John JacksonCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Jayashree Kalpathy-CramerDivision of Artificial Medical Intelligence, Ophthalmology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado.
J Peter CampbellCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Xubo SongCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Travis K ReddCasey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Funding

Proteomics CoreP30EY010572 · NEI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Kate E Keller · 1995 to 2026
$19.4M
Translational Vision Science Research at Oregon Health & Science UniversityT32EY023211 · NEI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Yali Jia, Kate E Keller · 2013 to 2026
$2.4M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY010572NEI NIH HHS T32 EY023211
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Standard supervised learning assumes deterministic labels (e.g., positive or negative, present or absent), neglecting the diagnostic uncertainty inherent in clinical practice. We propose latent supervision, a novel algorithm which applies latent class analysis to incorporate multiple diagnostic tests or expert opinions to produce probabilistic labels (soft labels) for more accurate, calibrated ophthalmic artificial intelligence classifiers. Design: Comparison of calibration and classification performance among ophthalmic computer vision model training techniques. Subjects: Eleven thousand three hundred fifty-eight children aged 0 to 9 years evaluated as part of multinational trachoma screening, and 2100 adult subjects with bacterial or fungal keratitis (or both) collated from multiple prior clinical studies. Methods: We compared latent supervision against supervised learning methods in 2 computer vision scenarios: trachoma screening with labels from different grader teams, and pathogen (fungal vs. bacterial) differentiation in infectious keratitis using labels derived from culture and smear results. Main Outcome Measures: Classification performance was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, F1 score, and accuracy. Model calibration was assessed by calibration curves and Brier score decomposition. Results: For the trachoma screening scenario, the grader 1, grader 2, grader 3, and ensemble supervised models had area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.88, 0.91, 0.90, and 0.93, respectively. The latent supervision model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.94 with better calibration. For the infectious keratitis scenario, the culture-supervised model outperformed the smear-supervised model in bacterial keratitis classification (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.87 vs. 0.79), while the opposite was true in fungal keratitis classification (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.78 vs. 0.85). The latent supervision model performed consistently well on both tasks with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.86, and showed good calibration. Conclusions: Latent supervision provides a computationally inexpensive method to train artificial intelligence models using probabilistic labels, which model the diagnostic uncertainty inherent in medicine. In both test cases evaluated, latent supervision appeared to provide benefits both in terms of classification performance and model calibration. The latter is particularly important to improve public trust and enable meaningful clinical implementation. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceInfectious keratitisLatent class analysisTrachoma

Identifiers

PMID42005908
PMCPMC13091327

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.