Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40074767›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Retrospective audit reviewing accuracy of clinical diagnosis of geographic atrophy in a single centre private tertiary retinal practice in Australia.

Demi Markakis, Alexis Ceecee Britten-Jones, Robyn H Guymer, Thomas L Edwards, Anthony J Hall, Nathan M Kerr, Weng Ng, Simon Skalicky, Lauren N Ayton, Heather G Mack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Demi MarkakisCabrini Hospital, Malvern, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8266-3769
Alexis Ceecee Britten-JonesOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1101-2870
Robyn H GuymerOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9441-4356
Thomas L EdwardsOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0238-7416
Anthony J HallCabrini Hospital, Malvern, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1760-3759
Nathan M KerrCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7381-285X
Weng NgEye Surgery Associates, 2/232 Victoria Pde, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-0526-9371
Simon SkalickyOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8022-8002
Lauren N AytonOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9907-084X
Heather G MackOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. hmack@eyesurgery.com.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9756-1098

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1195713State Government of Victoria Operational Infrastructure Support ProgramUniversity of Melbourne Driving Research Momentum FellowshipUniversity of Melbourne Postdoctoral Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate diagnosis of both age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and inherited retinal diseases (IRD) with macular atrophy is important because treatments for both conditions are emerging. Phenotypical similarities between macular atrophy associated with AMD (geographic atrophy, GA) and IRD-associated atrophy exist, which can make accurate diagnosis challenging in clinical practice. Misdiagnosis may lead to inappropriate treatment strategies and missed opportunities for disease-specific interventions. A retrospective clinical review of medical records of people diagnosed with AMD between 1995 and 2023 from a large multidisciplinary private ophthalmic practice in Australia was undertaken to identify cases of patients diagnosed with geographic atrophy without drusen, which was then further assessed for potentially missed IRD with macular atrophy. Flagged cases were presented to experts in AMD and IRD to establish a most-likely diagnosis. Cases without consensus between graders were grouped into most-likely diagnosis by a third senior retinal clinician. Of the 1136 cases reviewed, the possible rate of misdiagnosis observed was 1.9%, with 1.0% representing potentially missed IRDs, most commonly pattern dystrophy (0.5%). A multi-modal approach, including clinical features and patient history, is important to limit the possibility of misdiagnosis of GA, and identify a subset of patients who might benefit from genetic testing prior to considering possible treatments.

Indexed as

Geographic AtrophyAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaClinical AuditDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleHumansMacular DegenerationMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAge-related macular degenerationClinical auditInherited retinal diseaseMacular atrophy

Identifiers

PMID40074767
PMCPMC11903886

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.