ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Validation of an Algorithm for the Prediction of Diabetic Retinopathy in Type 1 Diabetic Patients in a Spanish Population.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present study was to build a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that can predict the presence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) patients. Material and Method: We built two versions of our CDSS to predict the presence of any-type DR and sight-threatening DR (STDR) in T1DM patients. The first version was trained using 324 T1DM and 826 T2DM patients. The second was trained with only the 324 T1DM patients. Results: The first version achieved an accuracy (ACC) = 0.795, specificity (SP) = 83%, and sensitivity (S) = 65.7% to predict the presence of any-DR, and an ACC = 0.918, SP = 87.1% and S = 87.8% for STDR. The second model achieved ACC = 0.799, SP = 87.5% and S = 86.3% when predicting any-DR and ACC = 0.937, SP = 90.9% and S = 83.0% for STDR. Conclusion: The two models better predict STDR than any-DR in T1DM patients. We will need a larger sample to strengthen our results.
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.