Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41792656›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical imaging2026

A prospective comparison of ultrawide-field and two-field fundus imaging for diabetic retinopathy assessment.

Yanzhen Li, Chenxi Fu, Liheng Xiu, Linyi Zhang, Xi Zhang, Chunhong Chen, Zhongwen Li

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05836194 (Comparison of Ultra-Widefield Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy and Two-Field Fundus Photography for Evaluating Diabetic Retinopathy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT05836194 completednot on this map

Comparison of Ultra-Widefield Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy and Two-Field Fundus Photography for Evaluating Diabetic Retinopathy

TypeobservationalSponsorNingbo Eye HospitalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled769ConditionsRetinal Diseases, Diabetic Retinopathy, Diabetes Complications, Diabetes Mellitus
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Yanzhen Li *Ningbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China.
Chenxi Fu *Ningbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China.
Liheng XiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Linyi ZhangNingbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China.
Xi ZhangNingbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China.
Chunhong ChenNingbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China.
Zhongwen LiNingbo Key Laboratory of Medical Research on Blinding Eye Diseases, Ningbo Eye Institute, Ningbo Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Ningbo, 315040, China. li.zhw@wmu.edu.cn.

Funding

the Medical Health Science and Technology Project of Zhejiang Province 2024XY040the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82201148the Ningbo Top Medical and Health Research Program 2023030716
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the efficacy of nonmydriatic ultrawide-field (UWF) imaging in diagnosing diabetic retinopathy (DR) compared to nonmydriatic 2-field 45° fundus photography (FP).

methodsA total of 769 eyes with diabetes were included in this prospective, observational, comparative, real-world study. We captured both nonmydriatic 2-field 45° FP and UWF images for each patient. Both imaging modalities were analyzed according to the International Classification of Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale to assess agreement in DR grading and image gradability. We also investigated DR lesions visible in UWF images beyond and within the scope of the 2-field 45° fundus images.

resultsUWF imaging and 2-field 45° FP showed substantial agreement in DR grading (weighted κ = 0.798), which decreased to moderate agreement (weighted κ = 0.495) after excluding the eyes graded as ‘no DR’ in both modalities. UWF imaging yielded higher severity grades in 14.33% of cases (87 eyes). A statistically significant difference was observed between UWF imaging and 2-field 45° FP in detecting DR (56.96% vs. 44.47%, p < 0.0001) and referable DR (46.81% vs. 36.02%, p < 0.0001). Among the 369 DR-affected eyes, 24.39% exhibited lesions mainly within the central field, 45.25% showed primarily peripheral lesions, and 30.35% presented lesions uniformly distributed. UWF imaging demonstrated a significantly lower ungradable rate for DR assessment compared to 2-field 45° FP (3.77% vs. 19.90%, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsUWF imaging offers significant advantages over 2-field 45° FP in DR detection, severity grading, and image gradability, demonstrating strong potential to enhance clinical DR management.

trial registrationThis study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05836194) on May 1, 2023.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyPhotographyAdultAgedFemaleFundus OculiHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexAgreement evaluationDiabetic retinopathyFundus photographyImage gradabilityUltra-wide field imaging

Identifiers

PMID41792656
PMCPMC13067663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.