Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39253550›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science

Improving the Identification of Diabetic Retinopathy and Related Conditions in the Electronic Health Record Using Natural Language Processing Methods.

Keith Harrigian, Diep Tran, Tina Tang, Anthony Gonzales, Paul Nagy, Hadi Kharrazi, Mark Dredze, Cindy X Cai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Semaglutide and diabetic retinopathy: an OHDSI network study.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2025 · on this map
    Observational
  5. 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

8 authors.

Keith HarrigianDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Diep TranWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Tina TangWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Anthony GonzalesWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Paul NagyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Hadi KharraziCenter for Population Health Information Technology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Mark DredzeDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Cindy X CaiWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

Impact of Social Determinants of Health in Diabetic RetinopathyK23EY033440 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Cindy Xinji Cai · 2022 to 2026
$1.1M
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY033440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the performance of 3 phenotyping methods in identifying diabetic retinopathy (DR) and related clinical conditions. Design: Three phenotyping methods were used to identify clinical conditions including unspecified DR, nonproliferative DR (NPDR) (mild, moderate, severe), consolidated NPDR (unspecified DR or any NPDR), proliferative DR, diabetic macular edema (DME), vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment (RD) (tractional RD or combined tractional and rhegmatogenous RD), and neovascular glaucoma (NVG). The first method used only International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes ( Subjects: Adults ≥18 years with diabetes mellitus seen at the Wilmer Eye Institute. Methods: We compared the performance of the 3 phenotyping methods in identifying the DR related conditions with gold standard chart review. We also compared the estimated disease prevalence using each method. Main Outcome Measures: Performance of each method was reported as the macro F1 score. The agreement between the methods was calculated using the kappa statistic. Prevalence estimates were also calculated for each method. Results: A total of 91 097 patients and 692 486 office visits were included in the study. Compared with the gold standard, the Conclusions: The prevalence of DR and related conditions varied significantly depending on the methodology of identifying cases. The best performing phenotyping method was the Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

Clinical free-text notesDiabetic retinopathyElectronic health recordNatural language processingPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID39253550
PMCPMC11382176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.