ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Can eye-tracking help to create a new method for X-ray analysis of rheumatoid arthritis patients, including joint segmentation and scoring methods?
Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reading hand and foot X-rays in rheumatoid arthritis patients is difficult and time-consuming. In research, physicians use the modified Sharp van der Heijde Sharp (mvdH) score by reading of hand and foot radiographs. The aim of this study was to create a new method of determining the mvdH via eye tracking and to study its concordance with the mvdH score. We created a new method of quantifying the mvdH score based on reading time of a reader monitored via eye tracking (Tobii Pro Lab software) after training with the aid of a metronome. Radiographs were read twice by the trained eye-tracking reader and once by an experienced reference radiologist. A total of 440 joints were selected; 416 could be interpreted for erosion, and 396 could be interpreted for joint space narrowing (JSN) when read by eye tracking (eye tracking could not measure the time spent when two pathological joints were too close together). The agreement between eye tracking mvdH Sharp score and classical mvdH Sharp score yes (at least one erosion or JSN) versus no (no erosion or no JSN) was excellent for both erosions (kappa 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96-0.99) and JSN (kappa: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.93-0.097). This agreement by class (0 to 10) remained excellent for both erosions (kappa 0.82; 95% CI: 0.79-0.0.85) and JSN (kappa: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.65-0.0.71). To conclude, eye-tracking reading correlates strongly with classical mvdH-Sharp and is useful for assessing severity, segmenting joints and establishing a rapid score for lesions.
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.