ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2026
Prediction of Maximum Keratometry Progression With Stratified Progression Criteria in Keratoconus Patients Using Machine Learning.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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: The aim of this study was to use machine learning to predict 12-months progression of maximum keratometry (Kmax) within stratified repeatability limits based on a baseline topography/optical coherence tomography measurement in patients with keratoconus (KC). Methods: This study included patients with diagnosed KC in which baseline and follow-up measurements were performed with a Placido disc topographer combined with optical coherence tomography (OCT) at a time interval of at least 7 months. Eyes were classified as "progressive" or "stable" based on the repeatability-adjusted difference in Kmax between the baseline measurement and a follow-up measurement. Nested cross-validation was used to train different algorithms, and the algorithm with the best area under the curve (AUC) value was used as final model. Results: A total of 102 eyes of 65 patients were included. Mean age was 33.2 ± 13.0 years. Predictors with high outer fold stability included specific KC markers such as the CSIB index and posterior K values. Within the internal folds, the model achieved an AUC of 0.82, a sensitivity of 62.2%, and a specificity of 83.2% and, in the outer left-out folds, a sensitivity of 65.6%, a specificity of 84.3%, and thus an accuracy of 78.4%. Conclusions: Progression of Kmax can be predicted with decent accuracy using a single OCT-based topographic measurement. Nested cross-validation represents a valuable tool in small datasets. Translational Relevance: Machine learning-based prediction of Kmax progression may aid in scheduling risk-adapted follow-up appointments, potentially leading to more rapid identification of progression-suspect KC cases.
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.