Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37816867›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Assessment of early diabetic retinopathy severity using ultra-widefield Clarus versus conventional five-field and ultra-widefield Optos fundus imaging.

Yuanyuan Xiao, Handong Dan, Xiaofeng Du, Michel Michaelide, Xiaodong Nie, Wanxiao Wang, Miao Zheng, Dongdong Wang, Zixu Huang, Zongming Song

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Modern Approach to Diabetic Retinopathy Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Yuanyuan Xiao *Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Handong Dan *Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Xiaofeng DuHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Michel MichaelideMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Xiaodong NieHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Wanxiao WangHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Miao ZhengHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Dongdong WangHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China.
Zixu HuangHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China. huang19910308@163.com.
Zongming SongHenan Provincial People's Hospital, Henan Eye Institute, Henan Eye Hospital, Henan Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, No. 7 Weiwu Road, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, China. szmeyes@126.com.
Henan Provincial People's Hospital · CNZhengzhou University · CNHenan University · CNHenan Provincial Eye Hospital · CNMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare early diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity level and the abilities in detecting early DR lesions among conventional five-field, ultrawide-field (UWF) Optos, and UWF Clarus fundus imaging methods. This was a single-center, prospective, clinic-based, and comparative study. In total, 157 consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent comprehensive ophthalmological examinations. Following mydriasis, each eye was examined with conventional five-field, UWF Optos, and UWF Clarus fundus imaging methods. The initial UWF images were overlaid with a template mask that obscured the retina, which created a five-field view from UWF images (covered UWF images). The covered UWF images were then graded, after which the template mask was removed, and the original UWF images were also evaluated. All images were graded using the International Clinical DR severity scale. DR grades were compared and analyzed by weighted kappa statistics among the three fundus imaging methods. In total, 157 consecutive patients with diabetes (302 eyes) were enrolled in this study. Weighted kappa statistics for agreement were 0.471 (five-field vs. covered Optos), 0.809 (five-field vs. covered Clarus), 0.396 (covered Optos vs. covered Clarus), 0.463 (five-field vs. Optos), 0.521 (five-field vs. Clarus 133°), 0.500 (five-field vs. Clarus 200°), 0.323 (Optos vs. Clarus 133°), and 0.349 (Optos vs. Clarus 200°). The area under curve of covered Clarus images was higher than that of conventional five-field images at three different thresholds. Compared with conventional five-field and Optos fundus imaging methods, Clarus fundus imaging methods exhibited excellent performance in assessing early DR severity. Thus, Clarus fundus imaging methods were superior for early detection of DR.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyDiagnostic ImagingFluorescein AngiographyFundus OculiHumansProspective StudiesRetina

Identifiers

PMID37816867
PMCPMC10564714
OpenAlexW4387493174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.