ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2019
Computer aided diabetic retinopathy detection based on ophthalmic photography: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deploying efficient net batch normalizations (BNs) for grading diabetic retinopathy severity levels from fundus images.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A new handheld fundus camera combined with visual artificial intelligence facilitates diabetic retinopathy screening.International journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Facial Recognition Intensity in Disease Diagnosis Using Automatic Facial Recognition.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo ensure the diagnostic value of computer aided techniques in diabetic retinopathy (DR) detection based on ophthalmic photography (OP).
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Ei village, IEEE Xplore and Cochrane Library database were searched systematically for literatures about computer aided detection (CAD) in DR detection. The methodological quality of included studies was appraised by the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). Meta-DiSc was utilized and a random effects model was plotted to summarize data from those included studies. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were selected to estimate the overall test performance. Subgroup analysis was used to identify the efficiency of CAD in detecting DR, exudates (EXs), microaneurysms (MAs) as well as hemorrhages (HMs), and neovascularizations (NVs). Publication bias was analyzed using STATA.
resultsFourteen articles were finally included in this Meta-analysis after literature review. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 90% (95%CI, 85%-94%) and 90% (95%CI, 80%-96%) respectively for CAD in DR detection. With regard to CAD in EXs detecting, pooled sensitivity, specificity were 89% (95%CI, 88%-90%) and 99% (95%CI, 99%-99%) respectively. In aspect of MAs and HMs detection, pooled sensitivity and specificity of CAD were 42% (95%CI, 41%-44%) and 93% (95%CI, 93%-93%) respectively. Besides, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 94% (95%CI, 89%-97%) and 87% (95%CI, 83%-90%) respectively for CAD in NVs detection. No potential publication bias was observed.
conclusionCAD demonstrates overall high diagnostic accuracy for detecting DR and pathological lesions based on OP. Further prospective clinical trials are needed to prove such effect.
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.