ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
IVCM-Insight: automated interactive interpretation of in vivo confocal microscopy.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) is a critical ophthalmic examination that provides in vivo cytological and neurological information essential for diagnosing corneal and certain systemic diseases, but its clinical utility is limited by time-consuming interpretation and the need for subspecialty expertise. We developed IVCM-Insight, an artificial intelligence (AI) system integrating image-text contrastive learning with large language models (LLMs) for automated report generation and interactive question answering (QA). Based on 30,368 IVCM images and 4155 paired clinical reports, the model was trained with contrastive alignment, image-conditioned language modeling, and multi-image consistency loss to produce structured diagnostic reports while a domain-adapted LLM supported patient-centered QA. Automated evaluation showed strong agreement with the reference reports: Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU)-1 to BLEU-4 scores were 0.69, 0.58, 0.47, and 0.41, Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation (ROUGE-L) was 0.67, Consensus-based Image Description Evaluation (CIDEr) was 1.85, and Metric for Evaluation of Translation with Explicit Ordering (METEOR) was 0.66. In addition, the multi-label classification achieved an accuracy of 0.96 and an F1 score of 0.80. Manual assessment by corneal specialists rated report accuracy (4.17), completeness (4.19), coherence (4.70), and diagnostic support (4.06), with excellent inter-rater reliability; QA outputs achieved high accuracy (4.33), relevance (4.54), and non-harmfulness (4.81). Representative cases, including cytomegalovirus, fungal, and Acanthamoeba keratitis, demonstrated accurate detection of key findings and clinically safe explanations. To our knowledge, IVCM-Insight is the first dedicated AI system for comprehensive IVCM interpretation, with potential to enhance diagnostic efficiency, strengthen physician-patient communication, and broaden access to advanced corneal imaging across care settings.
Identifiers
42337008What 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.