Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34320110›Full record

ArticleArquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia

Clinical validation of a smartphone-based handheld fundus camera for the evaluation of optic nerve head.

Carolina C Titoneli, Marcio S Filho, Diego Lencione, Flavio Pascoal Vieira, José Augusto Stuchi, Jayter S Paula

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carolina C TitoneliFaculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3142-6704
Marcio S FilhoFundação PIO XII, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Diego LencionePhelcom Technologies, São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
Flavio Pascoal VieiraPhelcom Technologies, São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
José Augusto StuchiPhelcom Technologies, São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
Jayter S PaulaFaculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-8111-3810
Universidade de Ribeirão Preto · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the quality of retinal images captured with a smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera with that of retinal images captured with a commercial fundus camera and to analyze their agreement in determining the cup-to-disc ratio for a cohort of ophthalmological patients.

methodsA total of 50 patients from a secondary ophthalmic outpatient service center underwent a bilateral fundus examination under mydriasis with a smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera and with a commercial fundus camera (4 images/patient by each). Two experienced ophthalmologists evaluated all the fundus images and graded them on the Likert 1-5 scale for quality. Multivariate regression analyses was then performed to evaluate the factors associated with the image quality. Two masked ophthalmologists determined the vertical cup-to-disc ratio of each fundus image, and both the intraobserver (between devices) and interobserver agreement between them was calculated.

resultsNinety-eight images from 49 patients were processed in this study for their quality analysis. Ten images from five patients (four from commercial fundus camera and one from smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera) were not included in the analyses due to their extremely poor quality. The medians [interquartile interval] of the image quality were not significantly different between those from the smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera and from the commercial fundus camera (4 [4-5] versus 4 [3-4] respectively, p=0.06); however, both the images captured with the commercial fundus camera and the presence of media opacity presented a significant negative correlation with the image quality. Both the intraobserver [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.82, p<0.001 and 0.83, p<0.001, for examiners 1 and 2, respectively] and interobserver (ICC=0.70, p=0.001 and 0.81; p<0.001, for smartphone-based handheld fundus camera and commercial fundus camera, respectively) agreements were excellent and statistically significant.

conclusionsOur results thus indicate that the smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera yields an image quality similar to that from a commercial fundus camera, with significant agreement in the cup-to-disc ratios between them. In addition to the good outcomes recorded, the smartphone-based, handheld fundus camera offers the advantages of portability and low-cost to serve as an alternative for fundus documentation for future telemedicine approaches in medical interventions.

Indexed as

Optic DiskFluorescein AngiographyFundus OculiHumansPhotographySmartphone

Identifiers

PMID34320110
PMCPMC11884363
OpenAlexW3178123733

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.