ArticleOphthalmology science
Automated Identification of Different Severity Levels of Diabetic Retinopathy Using a Handheld Fundus Camera and Single-Image Protocol.
Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Approaches in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- The Underutilized Ocular Fundus in Emergency Departments: Current Progress and Future Prospect of Imaging and Artificial Intelligence for Patient Care.Ophthalmology science · 2026Review
- A comprehensive review on automated diabetic retinopathy detection and classification using fundus image.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Diabetic Retinopathy in Primary Healthcare in a Brazilian Municipality: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Teleophthalmology.Health care science · 2026Article
- AI-Assisted detection of corneal nerve structural abnormalities in early diabetic keratopathy: development and validation of a deep learning framework.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integrating Ophthalmology, Endocrinology, and Digital Health: A Bibliometric Analysis of Telemedicine for Diabetic Retinopathy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Federated multimodal AI for precision-equitable diabetes care.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Utility of handheld non-mydriatic fundoscopy in a case of bilateral, reversible vision loss in an advanced HIV patient with cryptococcal meningitis in Sub-Saharan Africa.Medical mycology case reports · 2024Article
- Advancing healthcare with artificial intelligence: diagnostic accuracy of machine learning algorithm in diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy in the Brazilian population.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
- 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
Purpose: To evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems embedded in a mobile, handheld retinal camera, with a single retinal image protocol, in detecting both diabetic retinopathy (DR) and more-than-mild diabetic retinopathy (mtmDR). Design: Multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic study, conducted at 3 diabetes care and eye care facilities. Participants: A total of 327 individuals with diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2) underwent a retinal imaging protocol enabling expert reading and automated analysis. Methods: Participants underwent fundus photographs using a portable retinal camera (Phelcom Eyer). The captured images were automatically analyzed by deep learning algorithms retinal alteration score (RAS) and diabetic retinopathy alteration score (DRAS), consisting of convolutional neural networks trained on EyePACS data sets and fine-tuned using data sets of portable device fundus images. The ground truth was the classification of DR corresponding to adjudicated expert reading, performed by 3 certified ophthalmologists. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measures included the sensitivity and specificity of the AI system in detecting DR and/or mtmDR using a single-field, macula-centered fundus photograph for each eye, compared with a rigorous clinical reference standard comprising the reading center grading of 2-field imaging protocol using the International Classification of Diabetic Retinopathy severity scale. Results: Of 327 analyzed patients (mean age, 57.0 ± 16.8 years; mean diabetes duration, 16.3 ± 9.7 years), 307 completed the study protocol. Sensitivity and specificity of the AI system were high in detecting any DR with DRAS (sensitivity, 90.48% [95% confidence interval (CI), 84.99%-94.46%]; specificity, 90.65% [95% CI, 84.54%-94.93%]) and mtmDR with the combination of RAS and DRAS (sensitivity, 90.23% [95% CI, 83.87%-94.69%]; specificity, 85.06% [95% CI, 78.88%-90.00%]). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.95 for any DR and 0.89 for mtmDR. Conclusions: This study showed a high accuracy for the detection of DR in different levels of severity with a single retinal photo per eye in an all-in-one solution, composed of a portable retinal camera powered by AI. Such a strategy holds great potential for increasing coverage rates of screening programs, contributing to prevention of avoidable blindness. Financial Disclosures: F.K.M. is a medical consultant for Phelcom Technologies. J.A.S. is Chief Executive Officer and proprietary of Phelcom Technologies. D.L. is Chief Technology Officer and proprietary of Phelcom Technologies. P.V.P. is an employee at Phelcom Technologies.
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.