ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Comparing the Use of Measured and Smoothed Data in Forecasting Visual Field Tests Using Deep Learning.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of training and testing deep learning (DL) models for visual field (VF) forecasting using input-target pairs in which the target is either the measured VF test result, or its smoothed counterpart constructed via linear regression. Design: A retrospective data analysis study evaluating DL models for VF forecasting under multiple training and testing configurations. Subjects and Controls: A total of 1400 subjects (healthy and glaucoma patients) with 19 437 reliable Humphrey VF (24-2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm) tests collected from longitudinal cohorts at the University of Pittsburgh and New York University. Methods: Three DL-based pointwise VF forecasting methods were trained and tested under 4 different configurations formed by using measured and smoothed VF targets. Smoothed targets were constructed by applying linear regression over triplets of consecutive VF tests. Models were assessed using fivefold cross-validation and mean absolute error (MAE) as the training and testing metric. Main Outcome Measures: Mean absolute error of forecasted VF test results under various training and testing configurations. Results: Models trained and tested on smoothed VF targets consistently achieved lower MAEs compared to those trained and tested on measured VF targets. The performance improvements were most prominent in the 0.5- to 1.5-year forecast range. Furthermore, models trained with smoothed VF targets showed comparable performance when evaluated against measured VF targets. Conclusions: Using smoothed VF targets for training improves forecasting accuracy by guiding DL models to learn long-term trends in the data rather than forcing them to model noise and short-term variabilities, which are prevalent in VF test data. This approach aligns with clinical goals of assessing meaningful functional changes over time and suggested to be considered in future DL-based VF modeling efforts. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.