ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
The Detection of Spontaneous Venous Pulsation with Smartphone Video Ophthalmoscopy.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical utility of handheld fundus and smartphone-based camera for monitoring diabetic retinal diseases: a review study.International ophthalmology · 2024Review
- Non-invasive assessment of intracranial pressure through the eyes: current developments, limitations, and future directions.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Autonomous assessment of spontaneous retinal venous pulsations in fundus videos using a deep learning framework.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Utility of video-fundoscopy and prospects of portable stereo-photography of the ocular fundus in neurological patients.BMC neurology · 2022Article
- Telemedicine in ophthalmology in view of the emerging COVID-19 outbreak.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSpontaneous venous pulsation (SVP) has a high negative predictive value for raised intracranial pressure and is a useful sign when assessing patients with headache. The objective was to determine if smartphone-based video ophthalmoscopy can detect SVP. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn total 233 patients and 291 eyes were recruited from the Dunedin Hospital eye clinic from July to November 2018. Patients were examined by a clinician and graded for SVP with a slit lamp and 78 Dioptre lens. Videos were taken with a smartphone ophthalmoscope and graded by two separate clinicians blinded to the slit lamp findings.
resultsOnly 272 eyes of 215 patients were included, as others failed in the inclusion criteria for overall video quality. Sensitivity was calculated as how likely the presence of SVP on video was indicative of the presence of SVP on slit lamp. Sensitivity was 84.77% for Observer 1, with 128 videos graded as positive for SVP on video ophthalmoscopy of the 151 identified as positive on slit lamp examination. Sensitivity was 76.82% for Observer 2 with 116 videos correctly identified. The false positive rate was calculated as the number of videos graded positive for SVP that had been graded as negative on slit lamp examination. This was 10.74% for observer 1 and 31.40% for observer 2.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that SVP is detected by video ophthalmoscopy. This may be a useful triage, telemedicine and referral tool to be used for patients with headache in a primary care setting.
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.