人工智能公式与 3 种传统公式及 11 种组合方法在短轴长白内障手术中的屈光预测误差比较。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia Pub Date : 2024-09-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0215
Song-A Che, Mincheol Seong, Kookyoung Kim, Yong Woo Lee
{"title":"人工智能公式与 3 种传统公式及 11 种组合方法在短轴长白内障手术中的屈光预测误差比较。","authors":"Song-A Che, Mincheol Seong, Kookyoung Kim, Yong Woo Lee","doi":"10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the refractive prediction error of Hill-radial basis function 3.0 with those of 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in eyes with short axial lengths.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The refractive prediction error was calculated using 4 formulas (Hoffer Q, SRK-T, Haigis, and Hill-RBF) and 11 combination methods (average of two or more methods). The absolute error was determined, and the proportion of eyes within 0.25-diopter (D) increments of absolute error was analyzed. Furthermore, the intraclass correlation coefficients of each method were computed to evaluate the agreement between target refractive error and postoperative spherical equivalent.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 87 eyes. Based on the refractive prediction error findings, Hoffer Q formula exhibited the highest myopic errors, followed by SRK-T, Hill-RBF, and Haigis. Among all the methods, the Haigis and Hill-RBF combination yielded a mean refractive prediction error closest to zero. The SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination showed the lowest mean absolute error, whereas the Hoffer Q, SRK-T, and Haigis combination had the lowest median absolute error. Hill-radial basis function exhibited the highest intraclass correlation coefficient, whereas SRK-T showed the lowest. Haigis and Hill-RBF, as well as the combination of both, demonstrated the lowest proportion of refractive surprises (absolute error >1.00 D). Among the individual formulas, Hill-RBF had the highest success rate (absolute error ≤0.50 D). Moreover, among all the methods, the SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination exhibited the highest success rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hill-radial basis function showed accuracy comparable to or surpassing that of conventional formulas in eyes with short axial lengths. The use and integration of various formulas in cataract surgery for eyes with short axial lengths may help reduce the incidence of refractive surprises.</p>","PeriodicalId":8397,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia","volume":"88 2","pages":"e20230215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the refractive prediction errors of artificial intelligence formula with 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in cataract surgery on eyes with short axial length.\",\"authors\":\"Song-A Che, Mincheol Seong, Kookyoung Kim, Yong Woo Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the refractive prediction error of Hill-radial basis function 3.0 with those of 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in eyes with short axial lengths.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The refractive prediction error was calculated using 4 formulas (Hoffer Q, SRK-T, Haigis, and Hill-RBF) and 11 combination methods (average of two or more methods). The absolute error was determined, and the proportion of eyes within 0.25-diopter (D) increments of absolute error was analyzed. Furthermore, the intraclass correlation coefficients of each method were computed to evaluate the agreement between target refractive error and postoperative spherical equivalent.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 87 eyes. Based on the refractive prediction error findings, Hoffer Q formula exhibited the highest myopic errors, followed by SRK-T, Hill-RBF, and Haigis. Among all the methods, the Haigis and Hill-RBF combination yielded a mean refractive prediction error closest to zero. The SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination showed the lowest mean absolute error, whereas the Hoffer Q, SRK-T, and Haigis combination had the lowest median absolute error. Hill-radial basis function exhibited the highest intraclass correlation coefficient, whereas SRK-T showed the lowest. Haigis and Hill-RBF, as well as the combination of both, demonstrated the lowest proportion of refractive surprises (absolute error >1.00 D). Among the individual formulas, Hill-RBF had the highest success rate (absolute error ≤0.50 D). Moreover, among all the methods, the SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination exhibited the highest success rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hill-radial basis function showed accuracy comparable to or surpassing that of conventional formulas in eyes with short axial lengths. The use and integration of various formulas in cataract surgery for eyes with short axial lengths may help reduce the incidence of refractive surprises.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia\",\"volume\":\"88 2\",\"pages\":\"e20230215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0215\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0215","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较希尔-径向基函数 3.0 与 3 种传统公式和 11 种组合方法在短轴眼中的屈光预测误差:使用 4 种公式(Hoffer Q、SRK-T、Haigis 和 Hill-RBF)和 11 种组合方法(两种或两种以上方法的平均值)计算屈光预测误差。确定了绝对误差,并分析了绝对误差增量在 0.25 屈光度 (D) 以内的眼睛比例。此外,还计算了每种方法的类内相关系数,以评估目标屈光不正与术后球面等值之间的一致性:本研究包括 87 只眼睛。根据屈光预测误差的结果,Hoffer Q 公式的近视误差最大,其次是 SRK-T、Hill-RBF 和 Haigis。在所有方法中,Haigis 和 Hill-RBF 组合得出的平均屈光预测误差最接近零。SRK-T 和 Hill-RBF 组合的平均绝对误差最小,而 Hoffer Q、SRK-T 和 Haigis 组合的中位绝对误差最小。希尔-径向基函数的类内相关系数最高,而 SRK-T 的类内相关系数最低。海吉斯和希尔-径向基函数以及两者的组合显示出的屈光意外(绝对误差大于 1.00 D)比例最低。在单个公式中,希尔-RBF 的成功率最高(绝对误差小于 0.50 D)。此外,在所有方法中,SRK-T 和 Hill-RBF 组合的成功率最高:结论:希尔-径向基函数在短轴向长度的眼球中显示出与传统公式相当或更高的精确度。在短轴向长度的白内障手术中使用和整合各种公式可能有助于降低屈光意外的发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of the refractive prediction errors of artificial intelligence formula with 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in cataract surgery on eyes with short axial length.

Purpose: To compare the refractive prediction error of Hill-radial basis function 3.0 with those of 3 conventional formulas and 11 combination methods in eyes with short axial lengths.

Methods: The refractive prediction error was calculated using 4 formulas (Hoffer Q, SRK-T, Haigis, and Hill-RBF) and 11 combination methods (average of two or more methods). The absolute error was determined, and the proportion of eyes within 0.25-diopter (D) increments of absolute error was analyzed. Furthermore, the intraclass correlation coefficients of each method were computed to evaluate the agreement between target refractive error and postoperative spherical equivalent.

Results: This study included 87 eyes. Based on the refractive prediction error findings, Hoffer Q formula exhibited the highest myopic errors, followed by SRK-T, Hill-RBF, and Haigis. Among all the methods, the Haigis and Hill-RBF combination yielded a mean refractive prediction error closest to zero. The SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination showed the lowest mean absolute error, whereas the Hoffer Q, SRK-T, and Haigis combination had the lowest median absolute error. Hill-radial basis function exhibited the highest intraclass correlation coefficient, whereas SRK-T showed the lowest. Haigis and Hill-RBF, as well as the combination of both, demonstrated the lowest proportion of refractive surprises (absolute error >1.00 D). Among the individual formulas, Hill-RBF had the highest success rate (absolute error ≤0.50 D). Moreover, among all the methods, the SRK-T and Hill-RBF combination exhibited the highest success rate.

Conclusions: Hill-radial basis function showed accuracy comparable to or surpassing that of conventional formulas in eyes with short axial lengths. The use and integration of various formulas in cataract surgery for eyes with short axial lengths may help reduce the incidence of refractive surprises.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
200
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The ABO-ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE OFTALMOLOGIA (ABO, ISSN 0004-2749 - print and ISSN 1678-2925 - (ABO, ISSN 0004-2749 - print and ISSN 1678-2925 - electronic version), the official bimonthly publication of the Brazilian Council of Ophthalmology (CBO), aims to disseminate scientific studies in Ophthalmology, Visual Science and Health public, by promoting research, improvement and updating of professionals related to the field.
期刊最新文献
Multiple visible retinal emboli in branch retinal artery occlusion secondary to internal carotid artery occlusion. Scientific impact factor versus social impact of journals. Why, what, and where to publish scientific research. Early visual intervention, visual function analysis, and grating visual acuity outcomes in children with congenital Zika syndrome. Prevalence of myopic eyes in private practice and public care services in Brazil: 11 years of retrospective analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1