ArticleJournal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus2017
Comparison of strategies for grading retinal images of premature infants for referral warranted retinopathy of prematurity.
Article in Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Key factors in a rigorous longitudinal image-based assessment of retinopathy of prematurity.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Astragalus root extract inhibits retinal cell apoptosis and repairs damaged retinal neovascularization in retinopathy of prematurity.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine the accuracy of identifying referral-warranted retinopathy of prematurity (RW-ROP, defined as any zone I ROP, stage 3 or worse, or plus disease) from retinal image sets using three grading protocols: a single optic disk-centered image, a set of 3 horizontal images, and a 5-image set.
methodsIn this secondary analysis of images from the e-ROP study, a weighted sample of 250 image sets from 250 infants (125 with RW-ROP and 125 without RW-ROP) was randomly selected. The sensitivities and specificities for detecting RW-ROP and its components from a single disk center image, along with nasal and temporal retinal images, were calculated and compared with the e-ROP grading of RW-ROP of all 5 retinal images (disk center and nasal, temporal, superior, and inferior retinal images).
resultsRW-ROP was identified with a sensitivity of 11.2% (95% CI, 6.79%-17.9%) using a single disk center image, with a sensitivity of 70.4% (95% CI, 61.9%-77.9%) using 3 horizontal images, and a statistically higher sensitivity of 82.4% (95% CI, 75.0%-89.0%) using all 5 images (P = 0.002). The specificities were 100%, 86.4%, and 90.4%, respectively. For grading using 3 horizontal images, sensitivity was 14.3% for plus disease, 25% for zone I ROP, and 71.2% for stage 3 or worse compared to 40.8%, 50%, and 79.8% for grading using 5-image sets, respectively.
conclusionsBoth a single, disk-centered, posterior pole image and 3 horizontal images were less effective than a 5-image set in determining the presence of RW-ROP on qualitative grading by trained readers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.