Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30284381›Full record

ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2019

Personalized risk-based screening for diabetic retinopathy: A multivariate approach versus the use of stratification rules.

Marta García-Fiñana, David M Hughes, Christopher P Cheyne, Deborah M Broadbent, Amu Wang, Arnošt Komárek, Irene M Stratton, Mehrdad Mobayen-Rahni, Ayesh Alshukri, Jiten P Vora and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marta García-FiñanaDepartment of Biostatistics, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4939-0575
David M HughesDepartment of Biostatistics, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Christopher P CheyneDepartment of Biostatistics, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Deborah M BroadbentDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Amu WangDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Arnošt KomárekDepartment of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Irene M StrattonGloucestershire Retinal Research Group, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cheltenham General Hospital, Cheltenham, UK.
Mehrdad Mobayen-RahniDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Ayesh AlshukriDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Jiten P VoraDiabetes and Endocrinology, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Simon P HardingDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
University of Liverpool · GBCharles University · CZCheltenham General Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12016Medical Research Council MR/L010909/1Medical Research Council MR/R024847/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate our proposed multivariate approach to identify patients who will develop sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) within a 1-year screen interval, and explore the impact of simple stratification rules on prediction. MATERIALS AND

methodsA 7-year dataset (2009-2016) from people with diabetes (PWD) was analysed using a novel multivariate longitudinal discriminant approach. Level of diabetic retinopathy, assessed from routine digital screening photographs of both eyes, was jointly modelled using clinical data collected over time. Simple stratification rules based on retinopathy level were also applied and compared with the multivariate discriminant approach.

resultsData from 13 103 PWD (49 520 screening episodes) were analysed. The multivariate approach accurately predicted whether patients developed STDR or not within 1 year from the time of prediction in 84.0% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 80.4-89.7), compared with 56.7% (95% CI 55.5-58.0) and 79.7% (95% CI 78.8-80.6) achieved by the two stratification rules. While the stratification rules detected up to 95.2% (95% CI 92.2-97.6) of the STDR cases (sensitivity) only 55.6% (95% CI 54.5-56.7) of patients who did not develop STDR were correctly identified (specificity), compared with 85.4% (95% CI 80.4-89.7%) and 84.0% (95% CI 80.7-87.6%), respectively, achieved by the multivariate risk model.

conclusionsAccurate prediction of progression to STDR in PWD can be achieved using a multivariate risk model whilst also maintaining desirable specificity. While simple stratification rules can achieve good levels of sensitivity, the present study indicates that their lower specificity (high false-positive rate) would therefore necessitate a greater frequency of eye examinations.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDatasets as TopicDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic RetinopathyDisease ProgressionEarly DiagnosisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIndividualityMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineRisk Factorscohort studydiabetic retinopathyobservational studyprimary care

Identifiers

PMID30284381
PMCPMC6492102
OpenAlexW2894980769

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.