ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Wide-field imaging with smartphone based fundus camera: grading of severity of diabetic retinopathy and locating peripheral lesions in diabetic retinopathy.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modern Approach to Diabetic Retinopathy Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the performance of smartphone based wide-field retinal imaging (WFI) versus ultra-wide-field imaging (UWFI) for assessment of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) as well as locating predominantly peripheral lesions (PPL) of DR.
methodsIndividuals with type 2 diabetes with varying grades of DR underwent nonmydriatic UWFI with Daytona Plus camera followed by mydriatic WFI with smartphone-based Vistaro camera at a tertiary care diabetes centre in South India in 2021-22. Grading of DR as well as identification of PPL (DR lesions beyond the posterior pole) in the retinal images of both cameras was performed by senior retina specialists. STDR was defined by the presence of severe non-proliferative DR, proliferative DR or diabetic macular oedema (DME). The sensitivity and specificity of smartphone based WFI for detection of PPL and STDR was assessed. Agreement between the graders for both cameras was compared.
resultsRetinal imaging was carried out in 318 eyes of 160 individuals (mean age 54.7 ± 9 years; mean duration of diabetes 16.6 ± 7.9 years). The sensitivity and specificity for detection of STDR by Vistaro camera was 92.7% (95% CI 80.1-98.5) and 96.6% (95% CI 91.5-99.1) respectively and 95.1% (95% CI 83.5-99.4) and 95.7% (95% CI 90.3-98.6) by Daytona Plus respectively. PPL were detected in 89 (27.9%) eyes by WFI by Vistaro camera and in 160 (50.3%) eyes by UWFI. However, this did not translate to any significant difference in the grading of STDR between the two imaging systems. In both devices, PPL were most common in supero-temporal quadrant (34%). The prevalence of PPL increased with increasing severity of DR with both cameras (p < 0.001). The kappa comparison between the 2 graders for varying grades of severity of DR was 0.802 (p < 0.001) for Vistaro and 0.753 (p < 0.001) for Daytona Plus camera.
conclusionMydriatic smartphone-based widefield imaging has high sensitivity and specificity for detecting STDR and can be used to screen for peripheral retinal lesions beyond the posterior pole in individuals with diabetes.
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.