Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35567610›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2022

Validation of an autonomous artificial intelligence-based diagnostic system for holistic maculopathy screening in a routine occupational health checkup context.

Octavi Font, Jordina Torrents-Barrena, Dídac Royo, Sandra Banderas García, Javier Zarranz-Ventura, Anniken Bures, Cecilia Salinas, Miguel Ángel Zapata

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Octavi FontOptretina Image Reading Team, Barcelona, Spain.
Jordina Torrents-BarrenaBCN MedTech, Department of Information and Communication Technologies, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Dídac RoyoOptretina Image Reading Team, Barcelona, Spain.
Sandra Banderas GarcíaFacultat de Cirurgia i Ciències Morfològiques, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain. sandrabanderasgarcia@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3641-3806
Javier Zarranz-VenturaInstitut Clinic of Ophthalmology (ICOF), Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Anniken BuresOptretina Image Reading Team, Barcelona, Spain.
Cecilia SalinasOptretina Image Reading Team, Barcelona, Spain.
Miguel Ángel ZapataOptretina Image Reading Team, Barcelona, Spain.
Instituto de Microcirugía Ocular · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversitat Pompeu Fabra · ESVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to evaluate the ability of an autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) system for detection of the most common central retinal pathologies in fundus photography.

methodsRetrospective diagnostic test evaluation on a raw dataset of 5918 images (2839 individuals) evaluated with non-mydriatic cameras during routine occupational health checkups. Three camera models were employed: Optomed Aurora (field of view - FOV 50º, 88% of the dataset), ZEISS VISUSCOUT 100 (FOV 40º, 9%), and Optomed SmartScope M5 (FOV 40º, 3%). Image acquisition took 2 min per patient. Ground truth for each image of the dataset was determined by 2 masked retina specialists, and disagreements were resolved by a 3rd retina specialist. The specific pathologies considered for evaluation were "diabetic retinopathy" (DR), "Age-related macular degeneration" (AMD), "glaucomatous optic neuropathy" (GON), and "Nevus." Images with maculopathy signs that did not match the described taxonomy were classified as "Other."

resultsThe combination of algorithms to detect any abnormalities had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.963 with a sensitivity of 92.9% and a specificity of 86.8%. The algorithms individually obtained are as follows: AMD AUC 0.980 (sensitivity 93.8%; specificity 95.7%), DR AUC 0.950 (sensitivity 81.1%; specificity 94.8%), GON AUC 0.889 (sensitivity 53.6% specificity 95.7%), Nevus AUC 0.931 (sensitivity 86.7%; specificity 90.7%).

conclusionOur holistic AI approach reaches high diagnostic accuracy at simultaneous detection of DR, AMD, and Nevus. The integration of pathology-specific algorithms permits higher sensitivities with minimal impact on its specificity. It also reduces the risk of missing incidental findings. Deep learning may facilitate wider screenings of eye diseases.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyGlaucomaMacular DegenerationNevusOccupational HealthOptic Nerve DiseasesArtificial IntelligenceHumansPhotographyRetrospective StudiesROC CurveAge-related macular degenerationArtificial intelligenceDiabetic retinopathyRetinographyScreening

Identifiers

PMID35567610
PMCPMC9477940
OpenAlexW4280537221

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.