ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2022
Efficacy of smartphone-based retinal photography by undergraduate students in screening and early diagnosing diabetic retinopathy.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Nursing-Teleophthalmology Improves Diabetic Retinopathy Screening in Primary Healthcare, Reducing Unnecessary Referrals to Specialist Healthcare.International journal of nursing practice · 2025Article
- Application of smartphone ophthalmoscope in ophthalmic clinical practice and teaching.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Clinical Applications and Future Directions of Smartphone Fundus Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Association between area under the C-peptide curve during an oral glucose tolerance test and diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes patients.Journal of diabetes investigation · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the efficacy of retinal photography obtained by undergraduate students using a smartphone-based device in screening and early diagnosing diabetic retinopathy (DR).
methodsWe carried out an open prospective study with ninety-nine diabetic patients (194 eyes), who were submitted to an ophthalmological examination in which undergraduate students registered images of the fundus using a smartphone-based device. At the same occasion, an experienced nurse captured fundus photographs from the same patients using a gold standard tabletop camera system (Canon CR-2 Digital Non-Mydriatic Retinal Camera), with a 45º field of view. Two distinct masked specialists evaluated both forms of imaging according to the presence or absence of sings of DR and its markers of severity. We later compared those reports to assess agreement between the two technologies.
resultsConcerning the presence or absence of DR, we found an agreement rate of 84.07% between reports obtained from images of the smartphone-based device and from the regular (tabletop) fundus camera; Kappa: 0.67; Sensitivity: 71.0% (Confidence Interval [CI]: 65.05-78.16%); Specificity: 94.06% (CI: 90.63-97.49%); Accuracy: 84.07%; Positive Predictive Value (PPV): 90.62%; Negative Predictive Value (NPV): 80.51%. As for the classification between proliferative diabetic retinopathy and non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy, we found an agreement of 90.00% between the reports; Kappa: 0.78; Sensitivity: 86.96%; (CI: 79.07-94.85%); Specificity: 91.49% (CI: 84.95-98.03%); Accuracy: 90.00%; PPV: 83.33%; NPV: 93.48%. Regarding the degree of classification of DR, we found an agreement rate of 69.23% between the reports; Kappa: 0.52. As relating to the presence or absence of hard macular exudates, we found an agreement of 84.07% between the reports; Kappa: 0.67; Sensitivity: 71.60% (CI: 65.05-78.16%); Specificity: 94.06% (CI: 90.63-97.49%); Accuracy: 84.07%; PPV: 90.62%; NPV: 80.51%.
conclusionThe smartphone-based device showed promising accuracy in the detection of DR (84.07%), making it a potential tool in the screening and early diagnosis of DR.
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.