ArticleBMC global and public health2026
Using artificial intelligence-assisted retinal imaging devices operated by non-specialist workers in detecting diabetic retinopathy in Sri Lanka.
Article in BMC global and public health, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetic retinopathy (DR), a microvascular complication of diabetes, is an important cause of preventable blindness and can cause a significant reduction in the quality of life of working-age adults. Sri Lanka has one of the highest prevalences of diabetes globally, and like many low- and middle-income countries, faces significant barriers to DR screening. Easy-to-use, relatively cheap handheld retinal fundus imaging devices with automatic interpretation using artificial intelligence (AI) presents a new avenue for DR screening by non-specialist healthcare workers. This study piloted the use of one such device by non-specialist healthcare workers in a low-resource setting and aimed to evaluate image gradability and the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of the AI interpretation in this context.
methodsAdults with and without diabetes were recruited from a research clinic. Non-specialist healthcare workers received brief training to capture macular- and optic-disc-centred retinal images using an AI-assisted handheld retinal imaging camera (Remidio FOP NM-10), before and after mydriasis. The device generated reports identifying referrable DR. Participants also had visual acuity assessed and underwent slit lamp biomicroscopy by an ophthalmologist. We evaluated image gradability of the captured images pre- and post-dilation, as well as the DTA of the AI reports using the ophthalmologist's findings as the gold-standard.
resultsRetinal images were captured on both eyes of 119 participants, including 49 with diabetes. The proportion of participants that had ungradable images of at least one eye prior to mydriasis was 46.2%, and this fell to 15.1% after mydriasis. A higher percentage of older individuals (59% of those aged 55-64 years and 70% of those aged 65-74 years), 85% of those with cataracts and 58% of those with poor visual acuity had at least one eye with ungradable images pre-mydriasis, with these percentages reducing by 40-70% with mydriasis. The sensitivity and specificity for referral of patients compared to the gold-standard was 73.3% and 79.8% respectively, with image gradability a major driver of misclassification.
conclusionsThe AI-assisted retinal imaging camera used by non-specialist healthcare workers after minimal training, in a low-resource setting shows promise as a feasible tool to identify DR in dilated eyes.
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.