ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2019
Smartphone photography for screening amblyogenic conditions in children.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of smartphone technology for detection of paediatric ocular diseases-a systematic review.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- Home-based screening tools for amblyopia: a systematic review.Eye (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Pediatric Eye Evaluations Preferred Practice Pattern.Ophthalmology · 2023Guideline
- Automatic Refractive Error Estimation Using Deep Learning-Based Analysis of Red Reflex Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Special Issue "Pediatric Eye Disease: Screening, Causes and Treatment".Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Reliability of Smart Phone Photographs for School Eye Screening.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the red reflex: An overview for the pediatrician.World journal of methodology · 2021Article
- Clinically useful smartphone ophthalmic imaging techniques.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021Review
- Accuracy of Dental Photography: Professional vs. Smartphone's Camera.BioMed research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To validate the smartphone photography as a screening tool for amblyogenic conditions in children. Methods: Children between 5 to 8 years attending eye out patient department (OPD) were photographed (by an optometrist) with a smartphone to capture their pupillary red reflexes followed by clinical examination by the principal investigator (PI). The PI on the basis of clinical examination identified children with significant amblyogenic conditions and, subsequently, two ophthalmologists independently categorized the photographs on the basis of color, symmetry, and shape of the pupillary reflex into normal or abnormal. The identification of amblyogenic conditions on clinical examination was compared to that on photography. Refractive errors <3D and anisometropia <2D were excluded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of smartphone photography screening were determined. Results: In all, 250 children were screened. Clinically 23.6% were harboring amblyogenic conditions. The mean sensitivity and specificity of screening by smartphone were 94% and 91%, respectively. Conclusion: Smartphone photography is a reliable tool for detection of amblyogenic conditions in children.
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.