Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39741794›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024

Evaluating the Influence of Clinical Data on Inter-Observer Variability in Optic Disc Analysis for AI-Assisted Glaucoma Screening.

Sayeh Pourjavan, Gen-Hua Bourguignon, Cristina Marinescu, Loic Otjacques, Antonella Boschi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

5 authors.

Sayeh PourjavanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6235-0813
Gen-Hua BourguignonDepartment of Ophthalmology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium.
Cristina MarinescuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chirec Hospital Groups, Delta Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0004-1365-5900
Loic OtjacquesDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chirec Hospital Groups, Delta Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Antonella BoschiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the inter-observer variability in assessing the optic disc in fundus photographs and its implications for establishing ground truth in AI research. Methods: Seventy subjects were screened during a screening campaign. Fundus photographs were classified into normal (NL) or abnormal (GS: glaucoma and glaucoma suspects) by two masked glaucoma specialists. Referrals were based on these classifications, followed by intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements, with rapid decisions simulating busy outpatient clinics.In the second stage, four glaucoma specialists independently categorized images as normal, suspect, or glaucomatous. Reassessments were conducted with access to IOP and contralateral eye data. Results: In the first stage, the agreement between senior and junior specialists in categorizing patients as normal or abnormal was moderately high. Knowledge of IOP emerged as an independent factor influencing the decision to refer more patients. In the second stage, agreement among the four specialists varied, with greater concordance observed when additional clinical information was available. Notably, there was a statistically significant variability in the assessment of optic disc excavation. Conclusion: The inclusion of various risk factors significantly influences the classification accuracy of specialists. Risk factors like IOP and bilateral data influence diagnostic consistency among specialists. Reliance solely on fundus photographs for AI training can be misleading due to inter-observer variability. Comprehensive datasets integrating multimodal clinical information are essential for developing robust AI models for glaucoma screening.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclinical decision supportdiagnostic imagingglaucoma screeningmultimodal diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID39741794
PMCPMC11687089

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.