ArticleEye (London, England)2023
A systematic evaluation of human expert agreement on optical coherence tomography biomarkers using multiple devices.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosing exudative age-related macular degeneration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence Driven Adjusted OCT-Based Classification System for Diabetic Macular Edema (AIDME).Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Linking diabetic retinal changes with the occurrence of anxiety and depression in working population.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2026Article
- Determinants of Intergrader Agreement for Key Retinal Photography and OCT Biomarkers in AMD.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Human expert grading versus automated quantification of fluid volumes in nAMD, DME and BRVO.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of AI-based retinal fluid monitoring in neovascular age-related macular degeneration with manual assessment by different eye care professionals under optimized conditions.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- Investigation of the Reproducibility of Portable Optical Coherence Tomography in Diabetic Macular Edema.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Brolucizumab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema: Ophthalmology and Diabetology Treatment Aspects.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Genetic Risk and OCT-Based Phenotypic Associations in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
- Pivotal Trial Validating Usability and Visualization Performance of Home OCT in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Report 1.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
- Pivotal Trial Toward Effectiveness of Self-administered OCT in Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration. Report 2-Artificial Intelligence Analytics.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the agreement in evaluating optical coherence tomography (OCT) variables in the leading macular diseases such as neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO) among OCT-certified graders.
methodsSD-OCT volume scans of 356 eyes were graded by seven graders. The grading included presence of intra- and subretinal fluid (IRF, SRF), pigment epithelial detachment (PED), epiretinal membrane (ERM), conditions of the vitreomacular interface (VMI), central retinal thickness (CRT) at the foveal centre-point (CP) and central millimetre (CMM), as well as height and location of IRF/SRF/PED. Kappa statistics (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to report categorical grading and measurement agreement.
resultsThe overall agreement on the presence of IRF/SRF/PED was κ = 0.82/0.85/0.81; κ of VMI condition was 0.77, that of ERM presence 0.37. ICC for CRT measurements at CP and CMM was excellent with an ICC of 1.00. Height measurements of IRF/SRF/PED showed robust consistency with ICC = 0.85-0.93. There was substantial to almost perfect agreement in locating IRF/SRF/PED with κ = 0.67-0.86. Between diseases, κ of IRF/SRF presence was 0.69/0.80 for nAMD, 0.64/0.83 for DMO and 0.86/0.89 for RVO.
conclusionEven in the optimized setting, featuring certified graders, standardized image acquisition and the use of a professional reading platform, there is a disease dependent variability in biomarker evaluation that is most pronounced for IRF in nAMD as well as DMO. Our findings highlight the variability in the performance of human expert OCT grading and the need for AI-based automated feature analyses.
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.