ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparison of two ultra-widefield color-fundus imaging devices for visualization of retinal periphery and microvascular lesions in patients with early diabetic retinopathy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensitivity of ultra-widefield fundus photography for retinal break localisation in primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Influence of ocular biometry on peripheral retinal visualization: a comparative study of Clarus and Optos widefield imaging systems.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Comparison of Epiretinal Membrane Detection Rates Between OptosJournal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based analysis of retinal vascular changes in the preclinical and early stages of diabetic retinopathy using ultra-widefield fundus imaging: an observational cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Application of ultra-wide-field optical coherence tomography angiography in detecting peripheral lattice degeneration.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Exploring the Risk: Peripheral Retinal Degenerations in Young Australian Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A Comparison of Ultra-Widefield Imaging Quality Obtained with Zeiss Clarus and Optos for Virtual Medical Retina Services.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Barriers and enablers of access to diabetes eye care in Auckland, New Zealand: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- The Scanning CONfoCal Ophthalmoscopy foR DIAbetic eye screening (CONCORDIA) study paper 1.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Advances in Structural and Functional Retinal Imaging and Biomarkers for Early Detection of Diabetic Retinopathy.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Peripheral and Vitreous Pathology in Ultrawidefield Cameras in Diabetic Eyes.Ophthalmology. Retina · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparison of two ultra-widefield (UWF) color-fundus (CF) imaging devices in diabetic patients for visualization of retinal periphery and detection of early microvascular lesions. The total gradable areas (TGA) seen on non-mydriatic CF-images of two UWF-imaging devices (Optos Daytona P200T; Zeiss Clarus 700) were compared and differences in projected area measured. Retinal periphery outside the 7 standard fields (7SF) was divided into: F3 temporal, F4 superotemporal, F5 inferotemporal, F6 superonasal, F7 inferonasal. DR stage was evaluated in the 7SF and the TGA on images of both devices and compared using Cohens κ. 67 eyes of 67 patients (52.5 ± 15.3 years) were analysed. DR stages in the 7SF were no (n = 36 Optos, n = 35 Clarus), mild (n = 16 Optos, n = 17 Clarus), and moderate DR (n = 15). Optos depicted significantly more area in F3 (median [interquartile range]; 2.41% [1.06-4.11] vs 0% [0-0], P < 0.001) and Clarus in F7 (3.29% [0-7.69] vs 0% [0-3.27], P = 0.002). In 4 eyes DR-stage was higher using Optos due to peripheral lesions not seen on the Clarus. Interrater reliability of DR-stage on both devices was almost perfect in the 7SF (κ = 0.975) and the TGA (κ = 0.855). Reliability in detecting signs of early DR is high on both devices. Clarus allowed for better visualization of the inferonasal field, Optos of the temporal field.
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.