Trial reportJAMA network open2021
Pivotal Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence System for Autonomous Detection of Referrable and Vision-Threatening Diabetic Retinopathy.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03112005 (Assessment of EyeArt as an Automated Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Tool), which is not on this map. Cited by 140 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Assessment of EyeArt as an Automated Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Tool
Who cites it
140 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 211 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy and clinical performance of deep learning models for grading diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- Performance and limitation of machine learning algorithms for diabetic retinopathy screening and its application in health management: a meta-analysis.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence versus manual screening for the detection of diabetic retinopathy: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Trends and hotspots in the field of diabetic retinopathy imaging research from 2000-2023.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Applying Deep Learning in the Prediction of the Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases From Retinal Images.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical validation of artificial intelligence algorithms for the detection of different central-involved retinal pathologies and glaucoma from non-mydriatic images.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Trial
- Autonomous artificial intelligence increases screening and follow-up for diabetic retinopathy in youth: the ACCESS randomized control trial.Nature communications · 2024Trial
- Development and evaluation of a risk prediction model for diabetes mellitus type 2 patients with vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Trial
- Ocular Factors Affecting AI Diagnosis in Diabetic Retinopathy Screening for Resource-Limited Regions: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Current Trends in AI and Eye Disease Diagnostics.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- Editorial for the Special Issue "Applications of Biomedical Imaging and Sensing Technologies in Disease Diagnosis".Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Drivers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Adoption in Supporting Chronic Disease Management in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Review
- Review
- Screening for diabetic retinopathy with artificial intelligence in a primary care setting: a comparative cost analysis.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Clinical Performance and Implementation of AI-Enabled Paediatric Ophthalmic Screening, Triage, Diagnosis, and Surveillance in Primary, Community, and Referral-Linked Pathways: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Novel Musculoskeletal Hypotheses in the Armed Services Trauma and Rehabilitation Outcome (ADVANCE) Cohort: Development and Application of Sparse Group Factor Analysis Methodology.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Reference Standard for Validation of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Screening Algorithms.Ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Review
- Explicit Inclusion of Diabetes Mellitus Without Retinopathy Within Diabetic Retinopathy Prediction.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Validation is not enough: Longitudinal evidence of post-deployment fragility in clinical AI systems.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
80 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness in adults worldwide. Early detection and intervention can prevent blindness; however, many patients do not receive their recommended annual diabetic eye examinations, primarily owing to limited access. Objective: To evaluate the safety and accuracy of an artificial intelligence (AI) system (the EyeArt Automated DR Detection System, version 2.1.0) in detecting both more-than-mild diabetic retinopathy (mtmDR) and vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (vtDR). Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic study was preregistered (NCT03112005) and conducted from April 17, 2017, to May 30, 2018. A total of 942 individuals aged 18 years or older who had diabetes gave consent to participate at 15 primary care and eye care facilities. Data analysis was performed from February 14 to July 10, 2019. Interventions: Retinal imaging for the autonomous AI system and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) reference standard determination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome measures included the sensitivity and specificity of the AI system in identifying participants' eyes with mtmDR and/or vtDR by 2-field undilated fundus photography vs a rigorous clinical reference standard comprising reading center grading of 4 wide-field dilated images using the ETDRS severity scale. Secondary outcome measures included the evaluation of imageability, dilated-if-needed analysis, enrichment correction analysis, worst-case imputation, and safety outcomes. Results: Of 942 consenting individuals, 893 patients (1786 eyes) met the inclusion criteria and completed the study protocol. The population included 449 men (50.3%). Mean (SD) participant age was 53.9 (15.2) years (median, 56; range, 18-88 years), 655 were White (73.3%), and 206 had type 1 diabetes (23.1%). Sensitivity and specificity of the AI system were high in detecting mtmDR (sensitivity: 95.5%; 95% CI, 92.4%-98.5% and specificity: 85.0%; 95% CI, 82.6%-87.4%) and vtDR (sensitivity: 95.1%; 95% CI, 90.1%-100% and specificity: 89.0%; 95% CI, 87.0%-91.1%) without dilation. Imageability was high without dilation, with the AI system able to grade 87.4% (95% CI, 85.2%-89.6%) of the eyes with reading center grades. When eyes with ungradable results were dilated per the protocol, the imageability improved to 97.4% (95% CI, 96.4%-98.5%), with the sensitivity and specificity being similar. After correcting for enrichment, the mtmDR specificity increased to 87.8% (95% CI, 86.3%-89.5%) and the sensitivity remained similar; for vtDR, both sensitivity (97.0%; 95% CI, 91.2%-100%) and specificity (90.1%; 95% CI, 89.4%-91.5%) improved. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic study noted safety and accuracy with use of the EyeArt Automated DR Detection System in detecting both mtmDR and, for the first time, vtDR, without physician assistance. These findings suggest that improved access to accurate, reliable diabetic eye examinations may increase adherence to recommended annual screenings and allow for accelerated referral of patients identified as having vtDR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.