ArticleJournal of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus
Characterization of Errors in Retinopathy of Prematurity Diagnosis by Ophthalmologists-in-Training in Middle-Income Countries.
Article in Journal of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Retinopathy of prematurity training and education: A systematic review.Survey of ophthalmologyPooled it
- Multimodal Imaging, Tele-Education, and Telemedicine in Retinopathy of Prematurity.Middle East African journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo characterize common errors in the diagnosis of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) among ophthalmologistsin-training in middle-income countries.
methodsIn this prospective cohort study, 200 ophthalmologists-in-training from programs in Brazil, Mexico, and the Philippines participated. A secure web-based educational system was developed using a repository of more than 2,500 unique image sets of ROP, and a reference standard diagnosis was established by combining the clinical diagnosis and the image-based diagnosis by multiple experts. Twenty web-based cases of wide-field retinal images were presented, and ophthalmologists-in-training were asked to diagnose plus disease, zone, stage, and category for each eye. Trainees' responses were compared to the consensus reference standard diagnosis. Main outcome measures were frequency and types of diagnostic errors were analyzed.
resultsThe error rate in the diagnosis of any category of ROP was between 48% and 59% for all countries. The error rate in identifying type 2 or pre-plus disease was 77%, with a tendency for overdiagnosis (27% underdiagnosis vs 50% overdiagnosis; mean difference: 23.4; 95% CI: 12.1 to 34.7;
conclusionsOphthalmologists-in-training from middle-income countries misdiagnosed ROP more than half of the time. Identification of plus disease was the salient factor leading to incorrect diagnosis. These findings emphasize the need for improved access to ROP education to improve competency in diagnosis among ophthalmologists-in-training in middle-income countries.
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.