1. Tham, Y. et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 121, 2081-2090 (2014).
2. Tatham, A. J., Weinreb, R. N. & Medeiros, F. A. Strategies for improving early detection of glaucoma: the combined structure–function index. Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, NZ). 8, 611 (2014).
3. Weinreb, R. N., Aung, T. & Medeiros, F. A. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma: a review. JAMA. 311, 1901-1911 (2014).
4. Leite, M. T., Sakata, L. M. & Medeiros, F. A. Managing glaucoma in developing countries. Arq. Bras. Oftalmol. 74, 83-84 (2011).
5. Hennis, A. et al. Awareness of incident open-angle glaucoma in a population study: the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthalmology. 114, 1816-1821 (2007).
6. Susanna, R., De Moraes, C. G., Cioffi, G. A. & Ritch, R. Why do people (still) go blind from glaucoma? Translational vision science & technology. 4, 1 (2015).
7. Founti, P. et al. Overdiagnosis of open‐angle glaucoma in the general population: the Thessaloniki Eye Study. Acta Ophthalmol. 96, e859-e864 (2018).
8. Gulshan, V. et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs. JAMA. 316, 2402-2410 (2016).
9. Rajalakshmi, R., Subashini, R., Anjana, R. M. & Mohan, V. Automated diabetic retinopathy detection in smartphone-based fundus photography using artificial intelligence. Eye. 32, 1138-1144 (2018).
10. Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Yao, Z., Zhao, R. & Zhou, F. Machine learning based detection of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) from optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. Biomedical optics express. 7, 4928-4940 (2016).
11. Lee, C. S. et al. Deep-learning based, automated segmentation of macular edema in optical coherence tomography. Biomedical optics express. 8, 3440-3448 (2017).
12. Maeda, N., Klyce, S. D., Smolek, M. K. & Thompson, H. W. Automated keratoconus screening with corneal topography analysis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 35, 2749-2757 (1994).
13. Abràmoff, M. D., Lavin, P. T., Birch, M., Shah, N. & Folk, J. C. Pivotal trial of an autonomous AI-based diagnostic system for detection of diabetic retinopathy in primary care offices. NPJ digital medicine. 1, 1-8 (2018).
14. Bizios, D., Heijl, A. & Bengtsson, B. Trained artificial neural network for glaucoma diagnosis using visual field data: a comparison with conventional algorithms. J. Glaucoma. 16, 20-28 (2007).
15. Chan, K. et al. Comparison of machine learning and traditional classifiers in glaucoma diagnosis. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 49, 963-974 (2002).
16. Goldbaum, M. H. et al. Comparing machine learning classifiers for diagnosing glaucoma from standard automated perimetry. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 43, 162-169 (2002).
17. Sample, P. A. et al. Using machine learning classifiers to identify glaucomatous change earlier in standard visual fields. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 43, 2660-2665 (2002).
18. Liu, S. et al. A deep learning-based algorithm identifies glaucomatous discs using monoscopic fundus photographs. Ophthalmology Glaucoma. 1, 15-22 (2018).
19. Christopher, M. et al. Performance of deep learning architectures and transfer learning for detecting glaucomatous optic neuropathy in fundus photographs. Scientific reports. 8, 1-13 (2018).
20. Li, Z. et al. Efficacy of a deep learning system for detecting glaucomatous optic neuropathy based on color fundus photographs. Ophthalmology. 125, 1199-1206 (2018).
21. Shibata, N. et al. Development of a deep residual learning algorithm to screen for glaucoma from fundus photography. Scientific reports. 8, 1-9 (2018).
22. Yoo, T. K. & Hong, S. Artificial neural network approach for differentiating open-angle glaucoma from glaucoma suspect without a visual field test. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 56, 3957-3966 (2015).
23. Maetschke, S. et al. A feature agnostic approach for glaucoma detection in OCT volumes. PloS one. 14, e0219126 (2019).
24. Medeiros, F. A., Jammal, A. A. & Thompson, A. C. From machine to machine: an OCT-trained deep learning algorithm for objective quantification of glaucomatous damage in fundus photographs. Ophthalmology. 126, 513-521 (2019).
25. Muhammad, H. et al. Hybrid deep learning on single wide-field optical coherence tomography scans accurately classifies glaucoma suspects. J. Glaucoma. 26, 1086 (2017).
26. Devalla, S. K. et al. Glaucoma management in the era of artificial intelligence. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 104, 301-311 (2020).
27. Fung, S. S., Lemer, C., Russell, R. A., Malik, R. & Crabb, D. P. Are practical recommendations practiced? A national multi-centre cross-sectional study on frequency of visual field testing in glaucoma. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 97, 843-847 (2013).
28. Baxter, S. L., Marks, C., Kuo, T., Ohno-Machado, L. & Weinreb, R. N. Machine learning-based predictive modeling of surgical intervention in glaucoma using systemic data from electronic health records. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 208, 30-40 (2019).
29. Mehta, P. et al. Automated detection of glaucoma with interpretable machine learning using clinical data and multi-modal retinal images. BioRxiv. (2020).
30. Tielsch, J. M. et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am. J. Epidemiol. 134, 1102-1110 (1991).
31. Group, T. The age-related eye disease study (AREDS): design implications AREDS report no. 1.Control. Clin. Trials. 20, 573 (1999).
32. Koo, E. et al. Ten-year incidence rates of age-related cataract in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS): AREDS report no. 33. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 20, 71-81 (2013).
33. McKinney W. 2010. Data structures for statistical computing in python. In Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference. Vol. 445: 56-61. Austin, TX.
34. The pandas development team. pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas. (2020).
35. Chawla, N. V., Bowyer, K. W., Hall, L. O. & Kegelmeyer, W. P. SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Journal of artificial intelligence research. 16, 321-357 (2002).
36. Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. the Journal of machine Learning research. 12, 2825-2830 (2011).
37. Chollet, F. Keras. https://keras.io (2015).
38. Friedman, J., Hastie, T. & Tibshirani, R. Additive logistic regression: a statistical view of boosting (with discussion and a rejoinder by the authors). The annals of statistics. 28, 337-407 (2000).
39. Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learning. 45, 5-32 (2001).
40. Scikit-learn developers. Permutation feature importance. https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/permutation_importance.html#id2 (2020).
41. Saito, T. & Rehmsmeier, M. The precision-recall plot is more informative than the ROC plot when evaluating binary classifiers on imbalanced datasets. PloS one. 10, e0118432 (2015).
42. Salim, S., Netland, P. A., Fung, K. H., Smith, M. E. & Aldridge, A. Assessment of the student sight savers program methods for glaucoma screening. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 16, 238-242 (2009).
43. College of Optometrists. Guidance on the referral of Glaucoma suspects by community optometrists. (2010).
44. Wilson, M. R. et al. Depression in patients with glaucoma as measured by self-report surveys. Ophthalmology. 109, 1018-1022 (2002).
45. Shweikh, Y. et al. Measures of socioeconomic status and self-reported glaucoma in the UK Biobank cohort. Eye. 29, 1360-1367 (2015).
46. Masís, M., Kakigi, C., Singh, K. & Lin, S. Association between self-reported bupropion use and glaucoma: a population-based study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 101, 525-529 (2017).
47. Neustaeter, A., Vehof, J., Snieder, H. & Jansonius, N. M. Glaucoma in large-scale population-based epidemiology: a questionnaire-based proxy. Eye. 35, 508-516 (2021).
48. Girard, M. J. & Schmetterer, L. Artificial intelligence and deep learning in glaucoma: Current state and future prospects. (2020).
49. Tielsch, J. M. et al. Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma: the Baltimore Eye Survey. JAMA. 266, 369-374 (1991).
50. Leske, M. C., Connell, A., Schachat, A. P. & Hyman, L. The Barbados Eye Study: prevalence of open angle glaucoma. Arch. Ophthalmol. 112, 821-829 (1994).
51. Buhrmann, R. R. et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in a rural East African population. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 41, 40-48 (2000).
52. Bonomi, L. et al. Vascular risk factors for primary open angle glaucoma: the Egna-Neumarkt Study. Ophthalmology. 107, 1287-1293 (2000).
53. Dielemans, I. et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and systemic blood pressure in the general elderly population: the Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology. 102, 54-60 (1995).
54. Xu, L., Wang, Y. X. & Jonas, J. B. Ocular perfusion pressure and glaucoma: the Beijing Eye Study. Eye. 23, 734-736 (2009).
55. Wilson, J. M. G., Jungner, G. & World Health Organization Principles and practice of screening for disease. (1968).
56. Topouzis, F. et al. Factors associated with undiagnosed open-angle glaucoma: the Thessaloniki Eye Study. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 145, 327-335. e1 (2008).
57. Weinreb, R. N. Glaucoma Screening. (Kugler Publications, 2008).
58. Quigley, H. A. Current and future approaches to glaucoma screening. J. Glaucoma. 7, 210-220 (1998).
59. Shields, M. B. The challenge of screening for glaucoma. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 120, 793-795 (1995).
60. Tan, N. Y., Friedman, D. S., Stalmans, I., Ahmed, I. I. K. & Sng, C. C. Glaucoma screening: where are we and where do we need to go? Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 31, 91-100 (2020).
61. Mudie, L. I. et al. The Icare HOME (TA022) study: performance of an intraocular pressure measuring device for self-tonometry by glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology. 123, 1675-1684 (2016).
62. Caprioli, J. & Coleman, A. L. Intraocular pressure fluctuation: a risk factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. Ophthalmology. 115, 1123-1129. e3; 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.031 (2008).
63. Matlach, J. et al. Investigation of intraocular pressure fluctuation as a risk factor of glaucoma progression. Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, NZ). 13, 9; 10.2147/OPTH.S186526 (2019).