ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Unsupervised Clustering for POAG Phenotyping.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To identify and characterize clinically meaningful phenotypic subtypes of POAG using unsupervised clustering of multimodal clinical data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 4274 eyes from 4274 patients aged ≥40 years with POAG. Twenty-one clinical features encompassing visual field indices and progression slopes, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, optic nerve head parameters, and IOP level and variability were analyzed. Hierarchical clustering, K-means, and fuzzy C-means algorithms were applied, with stability assessed via internal validation metrics and visual field archetypal analysis. Results: Five reproducible POAG phenotypes were identified The. k-means and fuzzy C-means performed best (Calinski-Harabasz 731.76 and 731.43; Davies-Bouldin 1.59 and 1.60), with excellent pairwise agreement between them (κ = 0.97) compared with moderate agreement with hierarchical clustering (κ ≈ 0.55), and high overall stability (mean Adjusted Rand Index, 0.98 ± 0.02). Clusters 1 and 2 represented mild, stable phenotypes (mean deviation [MD] slopes of +0.14 and +0.10 dB/year), differing primarily in IOP burden. Cluster 3 showed structural-functional dissociation-significant RNFL thinning (71.40 ± 8.14 µm) despite limited functional progression (MD slope +0.08 dB/year). Cluster 4 exhibited the most aggressive course, with rapid functional decline (MD slope of -0.98 ± 0.58 dB/year), greatest IOP variability (3.88 ± 1.82 mm Hg), and advanced structural loss (RNFL 64.44 ± 10.05 µm). Cluster 5 demonstrated advanced baseline damage (MD of -15.28 ± 4.72 dB; RNFL, 62.87 ± 9.53 µm) with relative longitudinal stability. Visual field archetypes aligned with cluster-specific severity. Conclusions: Multimodal clustering identifies distinct POAG phenotypes, supporting improved risk stratification and targeted management.
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.