ArticleBeyoglu eye journal2022
Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreements of the Detection of
Article in Beyoglu eye journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Information Entropy-Based Framework for Quantifying Curve Tortuosity in Meibomian Glands Uneven Atrophy.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Demodicosis Mite Detection in Eyes with Blepharitis and Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Based on Deep Learning Model.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of the study was to determine interobserver and intraobserver agreement, repeatability, and intrasubject variation of the detection of Demodex infestation in eyelids of blepharitis patients using in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM). Methods: Eighty-three eyes of 42 blepharitis patients were included in the study. All eyelids were evaluated from temporal to nasal with IVCM using section mode and 10 lashes with their follicles were imagined, and every image with suspicion of Demodex infestation was recorded. Two experienced and two inexperienced ophthalmologists were masked for the diagnosis and interpreted the IVCM images regarding the presence of Demodex infestation with a 3-week interval. Interobserver and intraobserver agreements were calculated with Cohen's kappa and its variant statistics between and within experienced observers and between inexperienced observers. Results: While average sensitivity for the diagnosis of demodicosis in IVCM images was 83.35% for experienced and 51.35% for inexperienced observers, the average positive predictive value was 88.6% for experienced observers and 91.05% for inexperienced ones. Interobserver agreement between experienced observers was moderate (κ = 0.529) and intraobserver agreements within experienced observers were perfect (κ = 0.918 for observer-1; κ = 0.958 for observer-2). Interobserver agreement between inexperienced observers was poor (κ = 0.162) and intraobserver agreements within inexperienced observers were fair (κ = 0.427 for observer-3; κ = 0.475 for observer-4). Conclusion: The sensitivity, interobserver and intraobserver agreements in IVCM image analysis for the detection of Demodex infestation were highly associated with the clinical experience on IVCM imaging. In the hands of an experienced clinician, IVCM could be reliable for the diagnosis of ocular demodicosis.
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.