ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Comparison of Ultra-Wide Field Photography to Ultra-Wide Field Angiography for the Staging of Sickle Cell Retinopathy.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retinal Challenges in Sickle Cell Patients-Present and Future: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Ultra-Widefield Retinal Imaging versus Dilated Fundus Examination for the Detection of Sickle Cell Retinopathy: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Sickle Cell Retinopathy Imaging: Current Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Cross-modality transfer learning with knowledge infusion for diabetic retinopathy grading.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sickle cell retinopathy (SCR) is classified by Goldberg based on peripheral vascular changes. Ultra-wide field (UWF) imaging has enhanced visualization of the peripheral retina. However, there is no consensus on the optimal imaging technique for the screening of SCR. We performed a monocentric observational cross-sectional study to compare UWF fundus photography (UWF-FP) with UWF angiography (UWF-FA). All patients who underwent UWF-imaging (Optos, PLC, Scotland, UK) for screening of sickle cell retinopathy between January 2016 and December 2019 were retrospectively included. Eyes with previous laser treatment or concomitant retinal disease were excluded. UWF-FP images were graded based on the Goldberg classification by four graders with various degrees of experience. UWF-FA pictures were reviewed by an independent retina specialist. Differences in Goldberg staging across UWF-FP and UWF-FA were assessed. A total of 84 eyes of 44 patients were included. Based on UWF-FA, most eyes were stage 2 (77.4%) and 19 were stage 3 (22.6%). The pre-retinal neovascularization detection sensitivity on UWF-FP was 52.6 to 78.9%, depending on the graders. UWF-FA led to a later Goldberg stage of retinopathy, in most cases from stage 1 to stage 2. Neovascularization (stage 3) was not detected by our graders on UWF-FP in 21.1 to 57.9% of eyes. UWP-FP tends to underestimate Goldberg stages of retinopathy compared with UWF-FA and is less accurate when detecting neovascularization in sickle cell retinopathy, which has a direct impact on therapeutic management and prognosis.
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.