ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Automated postoperative SLO quantification across clinically recorded cataract subtype groups: an exploratory cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the application of automated quantitative scanning laser ophthalmoscopy analysis to early postoperative images and to characterize group-level variation in the resulting measurements across patients grouped according to clinically recorded age-related cataract subtype. Methods: This retrospective observational imaging study included 716 eyes from 571 patients with age-related cataract who underwent phacoemulsification combined with intraocular lens implantation between August 2023 and August 2025. Early postoperative scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO) images were analyzed using EVisionAI version 4.0 as a standardized automated quantitative image-analysis tool. Eyes were grouped as nuclear cataract (394 eyes), cortical cataract (217 eyes), or posterior subcapsular cataract (PSC; 105 eyes) according to routine preoperative slit-lamp records. Standardized LOCS III grading and cohort-specific validation of EVisionAI against manual annotations were not available in this retrospective dataset. Automated image-derived parameters included tessellated fundus-related features, optic disc morphology, peripapillary atrophy (PPA)-related parameters, and retinal vascular parameters. Patient-level baseline characteristics were compared using conventional statistical tests, as appropriate. Eye-level comparisons of automated image-derived SLO parameters were performed using generalized estimating equations to account for inter-eye correlation, with Wald χ Results: After false discovery rate correction, multiple automated image-derived fundus parameters differed significantly among the retrospectively defined cataract subtype groups, including cup-to-disc ratio parameters, optic disc morphology, PPA-related parameters, and retinal vascular parameters. Compared with PSC eyes, nuclear and cortical cataract eyes showed relatively higher cup-to-disc ratio-related parameters and larger PPA-related parameters, whereas PSC eyes showed relatively greater retinal vessel length. Across age groups, tessellated fundus density, macular tessellated fundus density, optic disc-related tessellated fundus parameters, and PPA-related parameters increased significantly with age. Among the 14 contrasts involving the seven principal outcomes, standardized effect estimates were small to moderate (absolute standardized β, 0.258-0.619), and none met the descriptive threshold for a large effect. In multivariable GEE models, age remained associated with multiple tessellated fundus- and PPA-related parameters after adjustment for sex, axial length, and cataract subtype. Axial length also remained associated with optic disc tilt angle, PPA-related parameters, and tessellated fundus parameters. The age-overlap and single-eye sensitivity analyses showed generally consistent directions for the principal associations, although one optic disc tilt-angle contrast was attenuated after age restriction. Conclusion: Automated quantitative SLO analysis was completed in 716 of 821 initially available early postoperative images. Group-level differences were observed across clinically recorded cataract subtype groups, but these findings were exploratory and may reflect non-standardized subtype assignment, unmeasured spherical-equivalent refractive error, age, axial length, image characteristics, and other confounding. They should not be interpreted as subtype-specific structural phenotypes or as evidence of diagnostic, prognostic, or clinical decision utility. Prospective studies with standardized cataract grading and cohort-specific algorithm validation are required.
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.