SynthesisEye (London, England)2025
AI for glaucoma, Are we reporting well? a systematic literature review of DECIDE-AI checklist adherence.
Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress in the Synthesis of Evidence in Glaucoma: What We Know and the Gaps that Remain.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- Augmented Decisions: AI-Enhanced Accuracy in Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis systematic literature review examines the quality of early clinical evaluation of artificial intelligence (AI) decision support systems (DSS) reported in glaucoma care. Artificial Intelligence applications within glaucoma care are increasing within the literature. For such DSS, there needs to be standardised reporting to enable faster clinical adaptation. In May 2022, a checklist to facilitate reporting of early AI studies (DECIDE-AI) was published and adopted by the EQUATOR network.
methodsThe Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for studies published between January 2020 and May 2023 that reported clinical evaluation of DSS for the diagnosis of glaucoma or for identifying the progression of glaucoma driven by AI. PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023431343). Study details were extracted and were reviewed against the DECIDE-AI checklist. The AI-Specific Score, Generic-Item Score, and DECIDE-AI Score were generated.
resultsA total of 1,552 records were screened, with 19 studies included within the review. All studies discussed an early clinical evaluation of AI use within glaucoma care, as defined by the a priori study protocol. Overall, the DECIDE-AI adherence score was low, with authors under reporting the AI specific items (30.3%), whilst adhering well to the generic reporting items (84.7%).
conclusionOverall, reporting of important aspects of AI studies was suboptimal. Encouraging editors and authors to incorporate the checklist will enhance standardised reporting, bolstering the evidence base for integrating AI DSS into glaucoma care workflows, thus help improving patient care and outcomes.
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.