ReviewOphthalmology science2026
Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Postoperative Outcomes in Anterior Segment and Ocular Adnexa Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Review 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Topic: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied to support decision-making in ophthalmology. This review evaluates the ability of AI to predict postoperative outcomes after anterior segment and ocular adnexal procedures. Clinical Relevance: The prognostic application of AI algorithms, capable of handling multimodal, complex data, and modeling nonlinear relationships, may enhance perioperative patient counseling, surgical planning, and outcomes. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Compendex, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and gray literature. Studies that investigated only intraocular lens power calculation and refractive outcomes were excluded. Methodological quality was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Results: Twenty-eight studies were included (n = 2 871 898 eyes). Most procedures were corneal and ocular surface (50%), followed by glaucoma (25%) and cataract/oculoplastic procedures (25%). Tree-based algorithms (57%) dominated the representation layer, followed by deep learning algorithms (43%). Fourteen studies examined how AI performance compared with traditional prediction paradigms; in 13 (93%), AI outperformed traditional methods. Areas under the curve ranged from 0.33 to 0.99, reflecting substantial variation in outcome definitions and model design. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool assessment indicated that 75% of studies had high risk of bias, primarily due to insufficient reporting of model transparency and calibration metrics. Only 11% of studies incorporated external validation. Conclusions: Artificial intelligence models are promising in predicting anterior segment and adnexal ophthalmic surgical outcomes. While these models generally outperform conventional methods, methodological limitations persist. Future studies should incorporate external validation, standardized reporting, and assessment of workflow integration. Financial Disclosures: The author has no/the authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in 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.