Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34468695›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021

On Clinical Agreement on the Visibility and Extent of Anatomical Layers in Digital Gonio Photographs.

Andrea Peroni, Anna Paviotti, Mauro Campigotto, Luis Abegão Pinto, Carlo Alberto Cutolo, Yue Shi, Caroline Cobb, Jacintha Gong, Sirjhun Patel, Stewart Gillan and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

12 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Andrea PeroniVAMPIRE Project, Computing, School of Science and Engineering, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Anna PaviottiNIDEK Technologies Srl, Albignasego, Italy.
Mauro CampigottoNIDEK Technologies Srl, Albignasego, Italy.
Luis Abegão PintoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal.
Carlo Alberto CutoloClinica Oculistica, Di.N.O.G.M.I., University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Yue ShiDoheny Image Reading Center, Doheny Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Caroline CobbDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Jacintha GongDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Sirjhun PatelDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Stewart GillanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Andrew TathamPrincess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.
Emanuele TruccoVAMPIRE Project, Computing, School of Science and Engineering, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
NHS Tayside · GBUniversity of Dundee · GBDoheny Eye Institute · USHospital de Santa Maria · PTNinewells Hospital · GBPrincess Alexandra Eye Pavilion · GBUniversity of Genoa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate the inter-annotator variability of clinicians tracing the contours of anatomical layers of the iridocorneal angle on digital gonio photographs, thus providing a baseline for the validation of automated analysis algorithms. Methods: Using a software annotation tool on a common set of 20 images, five experienced ophthalmologists highlighted the contours of five anatomical layers of interest: iris root (IR), ciliary body band (CBB), scleral spur (SS), trabecular meshwork (TM), and cornea (C). Inter-annotator variability was assessed by (1) comparing the number of times ophthalmologists delineated each layer in the dataset; (2) quantifying how the consensus area for each layer (i.e., the intersection area of observers' delineations) varied with the consensus threshold; and (3) calculating agreement among annotators using average per-layer precision, sensitivity, and Dice score. Results: The SS showed the largest difference in annotation frequency (31%) and the minimum overall agreement in terms of consensus size (∼28% of the labeled pixels). The average annotator's per-layer statistics showed consistent patterns, with lower agreement on the CBB and SS (average Dice score ranges of 0.61-0.7 and 0.73-0.78, respectively) and better agreement on the IR, TM, and C (average Dice score ranges of 0.97-0.98, 0.84-0.9, and 0.93-0.96, respectively). Conclusions: There was considerable inter-annotator variation in identifying contours of some anatomical layers in digital gonio photographs. Our pilot indicates that agreement was best on IR, TM, and C but poorer for CBB and SS. Translational Relevance: This study provides a comprehensive description of inter-annotator agreement on digital gonio photographs segmentation as a baseline for validating deep learning models for automated gonioscopy.

Indexed as

Anterior ChamberTrabecular MeshworkGonioscopyIrisPhotography

Identifiers

PMID34468695
PMCPMC8419881
OpenAlexW3196511713

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.