Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38079169›Full record

Trial reportTranslational vision science & technology2023

Risk Stratification for Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Order Using Deep Learning: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

Ashish Bora, Richa Tiwari, Pinal Bavishi, Sunny Virmani, Rayman Huang, Ilana Traynis, Greg S Corrado, Lily Peng, Dale R Webster, Avinash V Varadarajan and 3 more

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Translational vision science & technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Artificial intelligence in pediatric myopia - a narrative review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

13 authors.

Ashish BoraGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Richa TiwariGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Pinal BavishiGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Sunny VirmaniGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Rayman HuangGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Ilana TraynisWork done at Google via Advanced Clinical, Deerfield, IL, USA.
Greg S CorradoGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Lily PengGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Dale R WebsterGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Avinash V VaradarajanGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Warisara PattanapongpaiboonDepartment of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Rangsit University, Rajavithi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Reena ChopraGoogle Health, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Paisan RuamviboonsukDepartment of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Rangsit University, Rajavithi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Real-world evaluation of a deep learning model that prioritizes patients based on risk of progression to moderate or worse (MOD+) diabetic retinopathy (DR). Methods: This nonrandomized, single-arm, prospective, interventional study included patients attending DR screening at four centers across Thailand from September 2019 to January 2020, with mild or no DR. Fundus photographs were input into the model, and patients were scheduled for their subsequent screening from September 2020 to January 2021 in order of predicted risk. Evaluation focused on model sensitivity, defined as correctly ranking patients that developed MOD+ within the first 50% of subsequent screens. Results: We analyzed 1,757 patients, of which 52 (3.0%) developed MOD+. Using the model-proposed order, the model's sensitivity was 90.4%. Both the model-proposed order and mild/no DR plus HbA1c had significantly higher sensitivity than the random order (P < 0.001). Excluding one major (rural) site that had practical implementation challenges, the remaining sites included 567 patients and 15 (2.6%) developed MOD+. Here, the model-proposed order achieved 86.7% versus 73.3% for the ranking that used DR grade and hemoglobin A1c. Conclusions: The model can help prioritize follow-up visits for the largest subgroups of DR patients (those with no or mild DR). Further research is needed to evaluate the impact on clinical management and outcomes. Translational Relevance: Deep learning demonstrated potential for risk stratification in DR screening. However, real-world practicalities must be resolved to fully realize the benefit.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDiabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyGlycated HemoglobinHumansProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID38079169
PMCPMC10715315

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.