Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38507191›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2024

Evaluation of a Digital Amsler Grid (PocDoc) for Macular Disease Screening: A Comparative Analysis with the Conventional Method.

Joewee Boon, William Rojas-Carabali, Yusra Asad, Jonathan Tzien Yih Lim, Rajesh Rajagopalan, Rupesh Agrawal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Joewee Boon *National Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
William Rojas-Carabali *National Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Yusra AsadNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Jonathan Tzien Yih LimLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Rajesh RajagopalanNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Rupesh AgrawalNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore. Rupesh_agrawal@ttsh.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6662-5850
Tan Tock Seng Hospital · SGNanyang Technological University · SGMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

NTF_DEC2019_I_C1_C_02 DEC2019_I_C1_C_02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMacular diseases are major contributors to visual impairment and blindness worldwide. This study introduces PocDoc, a digital version of the conventional Amsler grid, aimed at enhancing the screening and monitoring of macular diseases. We conducted a comprehensive evaluation to compare the effectiveness of PocDoc against the conventional method.

methodsOur comparative analysis involved two distinct phases. Initially, we assessed the capability of both PocDoc and the conventional method in detecting central visual field abnormalities. This phase included a cohort of 72 healthy and 155 eyes affected by various conditions such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD), uveitis, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and macular telangiectasia. We primarily focused on the area of compromise and observed the correlation between the results obtained from both methods, measuring their concordance using a correlation coefficient. In the second phase, we evaluated the accuracy of both methods in diagnosing AMD. This involved a group of 127 eyes, including 70 healthy and 57 AMD-affected eyes. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of each method in diagnosing AMD.

resultsIn the initial phase, both PocDoc and the conventional Amsler grid demonstrated a high correlation in detecting central visual field defects across various macular diseases (correlation coefficient > 0.9). In the second phase, focused on AMD diagnosis, PocDoc showed a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 100%, and an overall accuracy of 78%. Comparatively, the conventional method exhibited a sensitivity of 49%, specificity of 100%, and accuracy of 77%.

conclusionPocDoc's digital Amsler grid exhibits comparable effectiveness to the conventional method in both detecting visual field abnormalities across a range of macular diseases and specifically in the diagnosis of AMD. The high correlation in results, combined with the digital advantages of PocDoc, such as ease of use and potential for telemedicine applications, suggests its viability as a valuable tool in the screening and monitoring of macular diseases.

Indexed as

AccuracyAmsler gridDiagnosisScreeningTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38507191
PMCPMC11039616
OpenAlexW4393026386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.