Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34329651›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology2021

Diagnostic Accuracy of Monitoring Tests of Fellow Eyes in Patients with Unilateral Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Early Detection of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Study.

Sobha Sivaprasad, Katie Banister, Augusto Azuro-Blanco, Beatriz Goulao, Jonathan A Cook, Ruth Hogg, Graham Scotland, Heinrich Heimann, Andrew Lotery, Faruque Ghanchi and 8 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology, 2021. 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 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Ranibizumab port delivery system for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: Current evidence and surgical considerations.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Sobha SivaprasadMoorfields National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Katie BanisterHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Augusto Azuro-BlancoCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Ireland.
Beatriz GoulaoHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Jonathan A CookNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Ruth HoggCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Ireland.
Graham ScotlandHealth Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland.
Heinrich HeimannSt. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Andrew LoteryFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Faruque GhanchiBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, United Kingdom.
Richard GaleYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, United Kingdom.
Geeta MenonFrimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Surrey, United Kingdom.
Louise DowneyHull and East Yorkshire NHS Trust, Hull, United Kingdom.
Nicola HopkinsEssex County Hospitals, Colchester, United Kingdom.
Peter ScanlonGloucestershire Hospitals NHSFT, Cheltenham, United Kingdom.
Ben BurtonJames Paget University Hospital, Gorleston, United Kingdom.
Craig RamsayHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Usha ChakravarthyCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Ireland. Electronic address: u.chakravathy@qub.ac.uk.
University of Aberdeen · GBBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBEssex County Hospital · GBFrimley Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBGloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBHull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust · GBJames Paget University Hospital · GBNIHR Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HERU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of routinely used tests of visual function and retinal morphology compared with fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) to detect onset of active macular neovascularization in unaffected fellow eyes of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

designProspective diagnostic accuracy cohort study conducted in 24 eye clinics in the United Kingdom over 3 years.

participantsOlder adults (>50 years) with recently diagnosed unilateral nAMD with a fellow (study) eye free of nAMD.

methodsSelf-reported vision, Amsler, clinic-measured visual acuity (VA), fundus assessment, and spectral domain OCT. The reference standard is FFA.

main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity of the 5 index tests.

resultsOf 552 participants monitored for up to 3 years, 145 (26.3%) developed active nAMD in the study eye, of whom 120 had an FFA at detection and constituted the primary analysis cohort. Index test positives at nAMD detection in those confirmed by FFA were self-reported vision much worse (5), distortion on Amsler (33), 10-letter decrease in acuity from baseline (36), fundus examination (64), and OCT (110). Percentage index test sensitivities were: self-reported vision 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-9.8); Amsler 33.7 (95% CI, 25.1-43.5); VA 30.0 (95% CI, 22.5-38.7); fundus examination 53.8 (95% CI, 44.8-62.5); and OCT 91.7 (95% CI, 85.2-95.6). All 5 index test specificities were high at 97.0 (95% CI, 94.6-98.5), 81.4 (95% CI, 76.4-85.5), 66.3 (95% CI, 61.0-71.1), 97.6 (95% CI, 95.3-98.9), and 87.8 (95% CI, 83.8-90.9), respectively. The combination of OCT with one other index test that was a secondary outcome measure increased sensitivity marginally and decreased specificity for all combinations except fundus examination.

conclusionsTests of self-reported change in vision, unmasking of new distortion, measurements of acuity, and fundus checks to diagnose active nAMD performed poorly in contrast to OCT. Our findings support a change to guidelines in clinical practice to monitor for onset of nAMD.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques, OphthalmologicalAgedCohort StudiesCorneal NeovascularizationDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEarly DiagnosisFemaleFluorescein AngiographyFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleProspective StudiesReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportSensitivity and SpecificityAmslerDiagnostic accuracyFluorescein angiographyNeovascular age-related macular degenerationOCTSensitivity and specificityVisual acuity

Identifiers

PMID34329651
PMCPMC8639888
OpenAlexW3184396516

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.