ArticleHardwareX2025
Development of an embedded diagnostic tool for visual misalignment screening.
Article in HardwareX, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article presents the design, implementation, and validation of a low-cost embedded system for preliminary strabismus screening, based on computer vision and deep learning. The hardware integrates a Raspberry Pi 4, a USB camera, and a 3D-printed chin rest to ensure consistent facial positioning. The software, developed in Python using PyQt5 and OpenCV, incorporates a NASNetLarge convolutional neural network converted to TensorFlow Lite for real-time inference. The graphical interface allows users to capture or upload images, perform automated analysis, generate diagnostic PDF reports, and access a gamified treatment module. Functional validation included a proprietary dataset of 27 images, achieving a 96.30 % classification accuracy. Additionally, a stratified 10-fold cross-validation on a balanced dataset of 1000 images yielded an average accuracy of 95.6 % with strong generalization metrics (F1-score, precision, and recall above 94 %). A novel treatment validation mechanism was implemented by analyzing pupil-to-stimulus distance frame-by-frame, confirming reliable eye tracking and the system's potential for detecting microstrabismus. This open-source, portable prototype is suitable for community health screening and educational use, particularly in low-resource settings.
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.