4.6 Review

Performances of artificial intelligence in detecting pathologic myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

EYE
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-023-02551-7

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This meta-analysis and systematic review showed that current AI algorithms have excellent performance in detecting PM and related complications based on fundus and OCT images.
Background/ObjectivePathologic myopia (PM) is a major cause of severe visual impairment and blindness, and current applications of artificial intelligence (AI) have covered the diagnosis and classification of PM. This meta-analysis and systematic review aimed to evaluate the overall performance of AI-based models in detecting PM and related complications.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and IEEE Xplore for eligible studies before Dec 20, 2022. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). We calculated the pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE) and the summary area under the curve (AUC) using a random effects model, to evaluate the performance of AI in the detection of PM based on fundus or optical coherence tomography (OCT) images.Results22 studies were included in the systematic review, and 14 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. Of all included studies, SEN and SPE ranged from 80.0% to 98.7% and from 79.5% to 100.0% for PM detection, respectively. For the detection of PM, the summary AUC was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 0.99), and the pooled SEN and SPE were 0.95 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.96) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.98), respectively. For the detection of PM-related choroid neovascularization (CNV), the summary AUC was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99).ConclusionOur review demonstrated the excellent performance of current AI algorithms in detecting PM and related complications based on fundus and OCT images.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available