Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29520050›Full record

ArticleEye (London, England)2018

Automated diabetic retinopathy detection in smartphone-based fundus photography using artificial intelligence.

Ramachandran Rajalakshmi, Radhakrishnan Subashini, Ranjit Mohan Anjana, Viswanathan Mohan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 173 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
173citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
30.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

173 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 442 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

113 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ramachandran RajalakshmiDr. Mohan's Diabetes Specialities Centre & Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, WHO Collaborating Centre for Noncommunicable Diseases Prevention and Control, IDF Centre of Excellence in Diabetes Care & ICMR Centre for Advanced Research on Diabetes, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. drraj@drmohans.com.
Radhakrishnan SubashiniDr. Mohan's Diabetes Specialities Centre & Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, WHO Collaborating Centre for Noncommunicable Diseases Prevention and Control, IDF Centre of Excellence in Diabetes Care & ICMR Centre for Advanced Research on Diabetes, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Ranjit Mohan AnjanaDr. Mohan's Diabetes Specialities Centre & Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, WHO Collaborating Centre for Noncommunicable Diseases Prevention and Control, IDF Centre of Excellence in Diabetes Care & ICMR Centre for Advanced Research on Diabetes, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Viswanathan MohanDr. Mohan's Diabetes Specialities Centre & Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, WHO Collaborating Centre for Noncommunicable Diseases Prevention and Control, IDF Centre of Excellence in Diabetes Care & ICMR Centre for Advanced Research on Diabetes, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Madras Diabetes Research Foundation · INDr. Mohan's Diabetes Specialities Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the role of artificial intelligence (AI)-based automated software for detection of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and sight-threatening DR (STDR) by fundus photography taken using a smartphone-based device and validate it against ophthalmologist's grading.

methodsThree hundred and one patients with type 2 diabetes underwent retinal photography with Remidio 'Fundus on phone' (FOP), a smartphone-based device, at a tertiary care diabetes centre in India. Grading of DR was performed by the ophthalmologists using International Clinical DR (ICDR) classification scale. STDR was defined by the presence of severe non-proliferative DR, proliferative DR or diabetic macular oedema (DME). The retinal photographs were graded using a validated AI DR screening software (EyeArt

resultsRetinal images of 296 patients were graded. DR was detected by the ophthalmologists in 191 (64.5%) and by the AI software in 203 (68.6%) patients while STDR was detected in 112 (37.8%) and 146 (49.3%) patients, respectively. The AI software showed 95.8% (95% CI 92.9-98.7) sensitivity and 80.2% (95% CI 72.6-87.8) specificity for detecting any DR and 99.1% (95% CI 95.1-99.9) sensitivity and 80.4% (95% CI 73.9-85.9) specificity in detecting STDR with a kappa agreement of k = 0.78 (p < 0.001) and k = 0.75 (p < 0.001), respectively.

conclusionsAutomated AI analysis of FOP smartphone retinal imaging has very high sensitivity for detecting DR and STDR and thus can be an initial tool for mass retinal screening in people with diabetes.

Indexed as

SmartphoneAdultDiabetic RetinopathyDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotographyPredictive Value of TestsRetinaSensitivity and SpecificitySoftware

Identifiers

PMID29520050
PMCPMC5997766
OpenAlexW2789360655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.