Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36018419›Full record

ArticleInternational ophthalmology2023

Assessing the subjective quality of smartphone anterior segment photography: a non-inferiority study.

Raghav Goel, Carmelo Macri, Bobak Bahrami, Robert Casson, Weng Onn Chan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raghav GoelDiscipline of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia. raghav.goel@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-578X
Carmelo MacriDepartment of Ophthalmology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Port Road, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
Bobak BahramiDiscipline of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
Robert CassonDiscipline of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
Weng Onn ChanDiscipline of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
The University of Adelaide · AURoyal Adelaide Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the subjective quality of anterior segment photos taken from a smartphone camera adapted to the slit lamp compared to a commercial inbuilt slit-lamp camera.

methodsNon-inferiority study. Five paired images of the anterior segment of normal eyes were taken using an iPhone 11 (Apple, Inc., Calif., USA) camera attached to a universal slit-lamp adaptor and a commercial inbuilt slit-lamp camera (Haag-Streit Diagnostics, Bern, Switzerland). Images were collated into a survey in which ophthalmology students, residents, registrars, and consultants participated to select the image taken from the inbuilt slit-lamp camera. If the image quality was subjectively indistinguishable, we expected a 50:50 split for each photograph that was presented. We selected a 10% non-inferiority margin, with the hypothesis that no less than 40% of images believed to be from the conventional camera were in fact from the smartphone camera.

resultsThere were 27 respondents in the survey: ophthalmology consultants (n = 7), registrars (n = 10), residents (n = 7), intern (n = 1) and students (n = 2). The mean correct identification across the respondents was 11.3 out of 25 (45.2%) images. Overall, the smartphone camera was non-inferior to the inbuilt slit-lamp camera (p < 0.001). The non-inferiority of the smartphone camera was significant for consultants (47.4%, p < 0.01), registrars (47.6%, p < 0.001) and residents (37.7%, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsAnterior segment images obtained with a smartphone camera were non-inferior to the commercial inbuilt slit-lamp camera. Smartphone cameras may be a non-inferior tool for communication of anterior segment images having implications for the ease of access to quality telehealth consultations.

Indexed as

OphthalmologySmartphoneHumansPhotographySlit LampSoftwareAnterior segmentIn-built slit lamp cameraNon-inferioritySmartphone photographyTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID36018419
PMCPMC9411845
OpenAlexW4293206525

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.