Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39723633›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025

Artificial intelligence virtual assistants in primary eye care practice.

Leandro Stuermer, Sabrina Braga, Raul Martin, James S Wolffsohn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Artificial intelligence virtual assistants in primary eye care practice.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
  4. Artificial intelligence in ophthalmology: opportunities, challenges, and ethical considerations.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2025
    Review
  5. 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

4 authors.

Leandro StuermerDepartment of Optometry, University of Contestado, Canoinhas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6433-2333
Sabrina BragaDepartment of Optometry, University of Contestado, Canoinhas, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0005-7285-3509
Raul MartinOptometry Research Group, School of Optometry, IOBA Eye Institute, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7156-619X
James S WolffsohnOptometry and Vision Sciences Research Group, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4673-8927

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo propose a novel artificial intelligence (AI)-based virtual assistant trained on tabular clinical data that can provide decision-making support in primary eye care practice and optometry education programmes.

methodAnonymised clinical data from 1125 complete optometric examinations (2250 eyes; 63% women, 37% men) were used to train different machine learning algorithm models to predict eye examination classification (refractive, binocular vision dysfunction, ocular disorder or any combination of these three options). After modelling, adjustment, mining and preprocessing (one-hot encoding and SMOTE techniques), 75 input (preliminary data, history, oculomotor test and ocular examinations) and three output (refractive, binocular vision status and eye disease) features were defined. The data were split into training (80%) and test (20%) sets. Five machine learning algorithms were trained, and the best algorithms were subjected to fivefold cross-validation. Model performance was evaluated for accuracy, precision, sensitivity, F1 score and specificity.

resultsThe random forest algorithm was the best for classifying eye examination results with a performance >95.2% (based on 35 input features from preliminary data and history), to propose a subclassification of ocular disorders with a performance >98.1% (based on 65 features from preliminary data, history and ocular examinations) and to differentiate binocular vision dysfunctions with a performance >99.7% (based on 30 features from preliminary data and oculomotor tests). These models were integrated into a responsive web application, available in three languages, allowing intuitive access to the AI models via conventional clinical terms.

conclusionsAn AI-based virtual assistant that performed well in predicting patient classification, eye disorders or binocular vision dysfunction has been developed with potential use in primary eye care practice and education programmes.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEye DiseasesOptometryPrimary Health CareAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle Agedartificial intelligenceclinical decision supportmachine learningoptometryvirtual assistant

Identifiers

PMID39723633
PMCPMC11823310

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.