Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33845003›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology2021

Classification Criteria for Birdshot Chorioretinitis.

Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) Working Group

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Peripapillary atrophy in patients with birdshot chorioretinitis.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2025
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Single-cell profiling identifies a CD8Nature communications · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

1 author.

Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) Working Group

Funding

DEVELOPING CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA FOR THE UVEITIDESR01EY026593 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI JABS, DOUGLAS A · 2016 to 2019
$1.5M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY026593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine classification criteria for birdshot chorioretinitis.

designMachine learning of cases with birdshot chorioretinitis and 8 other posterior uveitides.

methodsCases of posterior uveitides were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on diagnosis, using formal consensus techniques. Cases were split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used on the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the infectious posterior uveitides / panuveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated on the validation set.

resultsOne thousand sixty-eight cases of posterior uveitides, including 207 cases of birdshot chorioretinitis, were evaluated by machine learning. Key criteria for birdshot chorioretinitis included a multifocal choroiditis with (1) the characteristic appearance of a bilateral multifocal choroiditis with cream-colored or yellow-orange, oval or round choroidal spots ("birdshot" spots); (2) absent to mild anterior chamber inflammation; and (3) absent to moderate vitreous inflammation; or multifocal choroiditis with positive HLA-A29 testing and either classic "birdshot spots" or characteristic imaging on indocyanine green angiography. Overall accuracy for posterior uveitides was 93.9% in the training set and 98.0% (95% confidence interval 94.3, 99.3) in the validation set. The misclassification rates for birdshot chorioretinitis were 10% in the training set and 0% in the validation set.

conclusionsThe criteria for birdshot chorioretinitis had a low misclassification rate and seemed to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.

Indexed as

ConsensusMachine LearningBirdshot ChorioretinopathyChoroidFemaleFluorescein AngiographyFundus OculiHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetina

Identifiers

PMID33845003
PMCPMC8517033
OpenAlexW3154499878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.