ArticleArquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia2025
Evaluation of the effectiveness of a portable device for diagnosing cataract.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAccess to cataract treatment and diagnostic tools continues to be hindered by financial and logistical barriers. Thus, photography-based cataract analysis via portable devices offers a promising solution for the detection of cataracts in remote regions. In this study, the accuracy of a portable device that is based on the Lens Opacities Classification III System for diagnosing cataracts was analyzed.
methodsPhotographs of the anterior segment of the eye were taken in a low-light environment, and the pupillary region markings were automatically delineated using infrared photography. The captured images were automatically analyzed using a convolutional neural network. The study group included patients with cataracts, and the control group included patients without cataracts.
resultsA total of 270 eyes were analyzed, which included 143 eyes with cataracts and 127 control eyes. A total of 599 photos were analyzed. The isolated nuclear cataract was the most frequently detected subtype (37.5%), followed by a nuclear cataract associated with a cortical cataract (30.3%). The device's accuracy was 88.5% (Confidence intervals (CI), 83.19%-94.69%), specificity was 84.62% (CI 71.79%-97.30%), positive predictive value was 91.78% (CI 74.36%-97.30%), and negative predictive value was 82.50% (CI 74.36%-97.30%).
conclusionThe portable device is a simplified user-friendly cataract screening technique that can interpret results in remote regions. This innovation could mitigate the occurrence of cataract-induced blindness and prevent premature surgical interventions in early-stage cataracts.
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.