Machine Learning-based Prediction of LASIK Console Inputs for Aspheric Planning (Q-factor, Defocus, Astigmatism): A Translational Methods Study
garnier, s.
Show abstract
PurposeAspheric planning in laser refractive surgery remains difficult: surgeons often rely on empirical nomo-grams or simple linear regression for defocus and astigmatism, while console Q-factor modulation yields a variably predictable effect on asphericity and an inconsistent cross-effect on defocus. This translational methods proof-of-concept frames planning as supervised prediction of console-programmable inputs (de-focus, astigmatism, Q-factor) and evaluates competing models; it is not a clinical effectiveness study. MethodsWe analyzed an anonymized, retrospective, single-platform dataset of 2,448 complete-case treatments. Multi-output regressors (linear and nonlinear) were trained and compared using prespecified metrics (R2, MAE/MSE) and residual-distribution visualization/calibration. Actuator-response checks related programmed inputs to changes in defocus (Z20) and primary spherical aberration (Z40). External validation used a temporally later, device-shift cohort (n=147). ResultsLinear regression predicted defocus and astigmatism well (e.g., defocus R2=0.98) but degraded for Q-factor (R2=0.47), whereas nonlinear models improved Q-factor error and calibration. Actuator-response analyses showed strong coupling for defocus input (R2=0.97), moderate coupling of Q-factor to {Delta}Z40 (R2=0.51), and a weak Q[->]defocus cross-effect (R2=0.12). On external validation, the best model generalized: Defocus MAE 0.22 D (R2=0.98) and Q-factor MAE 0.21 (R2=0.81). ConclusionsSupervised nonlinear multi-output models achieve lower error and better calibration for Q-factor than linear baselines, supporting a metric-driven pathway toward more reliable control of low-order refractive targets and primary asphericity. Potential clinical implications include tissue sparing, improved contrast, and near-vision gains. Prospective, human-in-the-loop evaluation with safety and patient-reported endpoints is warranted.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Current applications of artificial intelligence for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy: a systematic review 93%
- Retinal implantation of electronic vision prostheses to treat retinitis pigmentosa: A systematic review 93%
- The learning curve of murine subretinal injection among clinically trained ophthalmic surgeons 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Artificial intelligence to facilitate clinical trial recruitment in age-related macular degeneration 93%
- A Computational Framework for Intraoperative Pupil Analysis in Cataract Surgery 92%
- Quantification of Fundus Autofluorescence Features in a Molecularly Characterized Cohort of More Than 3500 Inherited Retinal Disease Patients from the United Kingdom 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated Expert-level Scleral Spur Detection and Quantitative Biometric Analysis on the ANTERION Anterior Segment OCT System 93%
- AI-Powered Effective Lens Position Prediction Improves the Accuracy of Existing Lens Formulas 93%
- Performance of DeepSeek-R1 in Ophthalmology: An Evaluation of Clinical Decision-Making and Cost-Effectiveness 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.