Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38935031›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2024

Forecasting Myopic Maculopathy Risk Over a Decade: Development and Validation of an Interpretable Machine Learning Algorithm.

Yanping Chen, Shaopeng Yang, Riqian Liu, Ruilin Xiong, Yueye Wang, Cong Li, Yingfeng Zheng, Mingguang He, Wei Wang

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Shaping the future of myopia: artificial intelligence for vitreoretinal complications of high and pathologic myopia.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Yanping ChenState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Shaopeng YangState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Riqian LiuState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Ruilin XiongState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Yueye WangState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Cong LiState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Yingfeng ZhengState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Mingguang HeState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Wei WangState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate prediction model for myopic macular degeneration (MMD) progression in patients with high myopia. Methods: The Zhongshan High Myopia Cohort for model development included 660 patients aged 7 to 70 years with a bilateral sphere of ≤-6.00 diopters (D). Two hundred twelve participants with an axial length (AL) ≥25.5 mm from the Chinese Ocular Imaging Project were used for external validation. Thirty-four clinical variables, including demographics, lifestyle, myopia history, and swept source optical coherence tomography data, were analyzed. Sequential forward selection was used for predictor selection, and binary classification models were created using five machine learning algorithms to forecast the risk of MMD progression over 10 years. Results: Over a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 133 patients (20.2%) showed MMD progression in the development cohort. Among them, 69 (51.9%) developed newly-onset MMD, 11 (8.3%) developed patchy atrophy from diffuse atrophy, 54 (40.6%) showed an enlargement of lesions, and 9 (6.8%) developed plus signs. Top six predictors for MMD progression included thinner subfoveal choroidal thickness, longer AL, worse best-corrected visual acuity, older age, female gender, and shallower anterior chamber depth. The eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm yielded the best discriminative performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.87 ± 0.02) with good calibration in the training cohort. In a less myopic external validation group (median -5.38 D), 48 patients (22.6%) developed MMD progression over 4 years, with the model's AUROC validated at 0.80 ± 0.008. Conclusions: Machine learning model effectively predicts MMD progression a decade ahead using clinical and imaging indicators. This tool shows promise for identifying "at-risk" high myopes for timely intervention and vision protection.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDisease ProgressionMachine LearningMacular DegenerationMyopia, DegenerativeTomography, Optical CoherenceAdolescentAdultAgedChildFemaleFollow-Up StudiesForecastingHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID38935031
PMCPMC11216278

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.