ArticleScientific reports2024
Automated diagnosis of plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity using quantification of vessels characteristics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Information Entropy-Based Framework for Quantifying Curve Tortuosity in Meibomian Glands Uneven Atrophy.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Automatic Diagnosis of Plus Disease in Retinopathy of Prematurity Using Deep Learning.Beyoglu eye journal · 2026Article
- Explainability-informed patient-disjoint evaluation of deep learning for plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity with an ophthalmologist reader study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Does field of view matter? Assessing its impact on Plus disease diagnosis in retinopathy of prematurity.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- SmartPlus: a computer-based image analysis method to predict continuous-valued vascular abnormality index in Retinopathy of Prematurity.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- Computer-aided detection of retinopathy of prematurity severity assessment via vessel tortuosity measurement in preterm infants' fundus images.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Transforming the future of ophthalmology: artificial intelligence and robotics' breakthrough role in surgical and medical retina advances: a mini review.Frontiers in medicine · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The condition known as Plus disease is distinguished by atypical alterations in the retinal vasculature of neonates born prematurely. It has been demonstrated that the diagnosis of Plus disease is subjective and qualitative in nature. The utilization of quantitative methods and computer-based image analysis to enhance the objectivity of Plus disease diagnosis has been extensively established in the literature. This study presents the development of a computer-based image analysis method aimed at automatically distinguishing Plus images from non-Plus images. The proposed methodology conducts a quantitative analysis of the vascular characteristics linked to Plus disease, thereby aiding physicians in making informed judgments. A collection of 76 posterior retinal images from a diverse group of infants who underwent screening for Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) was obtained. A reference standard diagnosis was established as the majority of the labeling performed by three experts in ROP during two separate sessions. The process of segmenting retinal vessels was carried out using a semi-automatic methodology. Computer algorithms were developed to compute the tortuosity, dilation, and density of vessels in various retinal regions as potential discriminative characteristics. A classifier was provided with a set of selected features in order to distinguish between Plus images and non-Plus images. This study included 76 infants (49 [64.5%] boys) with mean birth weight of 1305 ± 427 g and mean gestational age of 29.3 ± 3 weeks. The average level of agreement among experts for the diagnosis of plus disease was found to be 79% with a standard deviation of 5.3%. In terms of intra-expert agreement, the average was 85% with a standard deviation of 3%. Furthermore, the average tortuosity of the five most tortuous vessels was significantly higher in Plus images compared to non-Plus images (p ≤ 0.0001). The curvature values based on points were found to be significantly higher in Plus images compared to non-Plus images (p ≤ 0.0001). The maximum diameter of vessels within a region extending 5-disc diameters away from the border of the optic disc (referred to as 5DD) exhibited a statistically significant increase in Plus images compared to non-Plus images (p ≤ 0.0001). The density of vessels in Plus images was found to be significantly higher compared to non-Plus images (p ≤ 0.0001). The classifier's accuracy in distinguishing between Plus and non-Plus images, as determined through tenfold cross-validation, was found to be 0.86 ± 0.01. This accuracy was observed to be higher than the diagnostic accuracy of one out of three experts when compared to the reference standard. The implemented algorithm in the current study demonstrated a commendable level of accuracy in detecting Plus disease in cases of retinopathy of prematurity, exhibiting comparable performance to that of expert diagnoses. By engaging in an objective analysis of the characteristics of vessels, there exists the possibility of conducting a quantitative assessment of the disease progression's features. The utilization of this automated system has the potential to enhance physicians' ability to diagnose Plus disease, thereby offering valuable contributions to the management of ROP through the integration of traditional ophthalmoscopy and image-based telemedicine methodologies.
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.