ArticleOphthalmology science2022
Comparison of Widefield Laser Ophthalmoscopy and ETDRS Retinal Area for Diabetic Retinopathy.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The scanning CONfoCal Ophthalmoscopy foR DIAbetic eye screening (CONCORDIA) study paper 2.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Prevalence of peripheral retinal findings in retinal patients using ultra-widefield pseudocolor fundus imaging.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparisons of handheld retinal imaging devices with ultrawide field images for determining diabetic retinopathy severity.Acta ophthalmologica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate agreement of nonmydriatic confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO; EIDON [CenterVue]) and the 7-standard field ETDRS area on ultrawide-field (UWF) SLO imaging for identification of diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity. Design: Single-site, prospective, comparative, instrument validation study. Participants: One hundred ten eyes of 55 patients with diabetes mellitus were evaluated. Methods: Each patient underwent nonmydriatic, nonsimultaneous stereoscopic imaging using the EIDON camera and 4 fields of 60° × 55° were acquired (macula centered, disc centered, temporal macula, superotemporal). Mydriatic UWF retinal images were acquired using a nonsimultaneous stereographic protocol with UWF imaging (California; Optos plc). Before grading, a standardized ETDRS 7-field image mask was applied to all UWF retinal images. Images from each device were graded independently by 2 masked graders using the ETDRS clinical DR classification. Any discrepancy in DR grading between the devices was adjudicated by a third grader. Main Outcome Measures: κ Levels of agreement, sensitivity, and specificity for DR thresholds. Results: Severity by ETDRS grading was as follows: no DR, 10.9%; mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 45.5%; moderate NPDR, 16.5%; severe NPDR, 11.8%; proliferative DR, 12.7%; high-risk proliferative DR, 2.7%; and ungradable, 0%. After adjudication, the level of DR identified on EIDON images agreed exactly with that of UWF ETDRS imaging in 87% of eyes (n = 96) and was within 1 step in 99.1% of eyes (n = 109) with a simple κ value of 0.8244 ± 0.0439 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7385-0.9104) and weighted (linear) κ value of 0.9041 ± 0.0257 (95% CI, 0.8537-0.9545). Sensitivity and specificity compared with ETDRS field grading for any DR were 0.96 and 0.75, for moderate NPDR or worse were 0.96 and 0.97, and for severe NPDR or worse were 0.91 and 1.00, respectively. Conclusions: Nonmydriatic 4-field stereoscopic widefield imaging using the EIDON device was comparable with the DR severity identified within the ETDRS 7-standard field area of UWF images. Future studies will need to evaluate the applicability of this device as a clinical and research tool and the impact of different widefield coverage areas.
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.