Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34349130›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Real-world artificial intelligence-based opportunistic screening for diabetic retinopathy in endocrinology and indigenous healthcare settings in Australia.

Jane Scheetz, Dilara Koca, Myra McGuinness, Edith Holloway, Zachary Tan, Zhuoting Zhu, Rod O'Day, Sukhpal Sandhu, Richard J MacIsaac, Chris Gilfillan and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Jane Scheetz *Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Dilara Koca *Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Myra McGuinnessCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Edith HollowayCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Zachary TanCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Zhuoting ZhuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Rod O'DayCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Sukhpal SandhuCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Richard J MacIsaacDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes and Department of Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Australia.
Chris GilfillanDepartment of Endocrinology, Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Angus TurnerLions Eye Institute, 2 Verdun St, Perth, Australia.
Stuart KeelCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.
Mingguang HeCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Level 7, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia. mingguang.he@unimelb.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the diagnostic performance, feasibility, and end-user experiences of an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening model in real-world Australian healthcare settings. The study consisted of two components: (1) DR screening of patients using an AI-assisted system and (2) in-depth interviews with health professionals involved in implementing screening. Participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus attending two endocrinology outpatient and three Aboriginal Medical Services clinics between March 2018 and May 2019 were invited to a prospective observational study. A single 45-degree (macula centred), non-stereoscopic, colour retinal image was taken of each eye from participants and were instantly screened for referable DR using a custom offline automated AI system. A total of 236 participants, including 174 from endocrinology and 62 from Aboriginal Medical Services clinics, provided informed consent and 203 (86.0%) were included in the analysis. A total of 33 consenting participants (14%) were excluded from the primary analysis due to ungradable or missing images from small pupils (n = 21, 63.6%), cataract (n = 7, 21.2%), poor fixation (n = 2, 6.1%), technical issues (n = 2, 6.1%), and corneal scarring (n = 1, 3%). The area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity of the AI system for referable DR were 0.92, 96.9% and 87.7%, respectively. There were 51 disagreements between the reference standard and index test diagnoses, including 29 which were manually graded as ungradable, 21 false positives, and one false negative. A total of 28 participants (11.9%) were referred for follow-up based on new ocular findings, among whom, 15 (53.6%) were able to be contacted and 9 (60%) adhered to referral. Of 207 participants who completed a satisfaction questionnaire, 93.7% specified they were either satisfied or extremely satisfied, and 93.2% specified they would be likely or extremely likely to use this service again. Clinical staff involved in screening most frequently noted that the AI system was easy to use, and the real-time diagnostic report was useful. Our study indicates that AI-assisted DR screening model is accurate and well-accepted by patients and clinicians in endocrinology and indigenous healthcare settings. Future deployments of AI-assisted screening models would require consideration of downstream referral pathways.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAdultAgedAustraliaDelivery of Health CareDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic RetinopathyEndocrinologyFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMedicine, TraditionalMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID34349130
PMCPMC8339059

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.