Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35396248›Full record

ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2022

Global disparity bias in ophthalmology artificial intelligence applications.

Luis Filipe Nakayama, Ashley Kras, Lucas Zago Ribeiro, Fernando Korn Malerbi, Luis Salles Mendonça, Leo Anthony Celi, Caio Vinicius Saito Regatieri, Nadia K Waheed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Stakeholder Attitudes on AI Integration in Ophthalmology.Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Behind the mask: a critical perspective on the ethical, moral, and legal implications of AI in ophthalmology.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Operationalising fairness in medical algorithms.BMJ health & care informatics · 2022
    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

8 authors.

Luis Filipe NakayamaSão Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, SP, Brazil nakayama.luis@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6847-6748
Ashley KrasRetinal Imaging Lab, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Lucas Zago RibeiroSão Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Fernando Korn MalerbiSão Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6523-5172
Luis Salles MendonçaSão Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Leo Anthony CeliMedicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6712-6626
Caio Vinicius Saito RegatieriSão Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Nadia K WaheedTufts Medical Center, New England Eye Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Critical Care Informatics: Ethical considerations around the use and sharing of health-related dataR01EB017205 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CELI, LEO ANTHONY G, MARK, ROGER GREENWOOD · 2014 to 2021
$3.8M
Critical Care InformaticsR56EB017205 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CELI, LEO ANTHONY G, GHASSEMI, MARZYEH · 2018 to 2023
$783k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB017205NIBIB NIH HHS R56 EB017205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceOphthalmologyBiasHumansartificial intelligencepublic health informatics

Identifiers

PMID35396248
PMCPMC8996038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.