Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33432168›Full record

Observational studyEye (London, England)2022

Clinical validation of an artificial intelligence-based diabetic retinopathy screening tool for a national health system.

José Tomás Arenas-Cavalli, Ignacio Abarca, Maximiliano Rojas-Contreras, Fernando Bernuy, Rodrigo Donoso

Erratum issuedAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Eye (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

José Tomás Arenas-CavalliTeleDx, Santiago, Chile. jtarenasc@teledx.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8205-7734
Ignacio AbarcaTeleDx, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8864-4200
Maximiliano Rojas-ContrerasTeleDx, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5147-2866
Fernando BernuyTeleDx, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3335-9848
Rodrigo DonosoTeleDx, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1779-142X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the accuracy and validity of an automated diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening tool (DART, TeleDx, Santiago, Chile) that uses artificial intelligence to analyze ocular fundus photographs for potential implementation in the national Chilean DR screening programme.

methodThis was an observational study of 1123 diabetic eye exams using a validation protocol designed by the commission of the Chilean Ministry of Health personnel and retina specialists.

resultsReceiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated a sensitivity of 94.6% (95% CI: 90.9-96.9%), specificity of 74.3% (95% CI: 73.3-75%), and negative predictive value of 98.1% (95% CI: 96.8-98.9%) for the automated tool at the optimal operating point for DR screening. The area under the ROC curve was 0.915.

conclusionsThe results of this study suggest that DART is a valid tool that could be implemented in a heterogeneous health network such as the Chilean system.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyArtificial IntelligenceHumansMass ScreeningRetinaROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID33432168
PMCPMC8727616

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.