ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Ultra-Widefield Retinal Imaging versus Dilated Fundus Examination for the Detection of Sickle Cell Retinopathy: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.
Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of ultra-widefield (UWF) imaging compared with dilated fundus examination (DFE) in detecting and staging sickle cell retinopathy (SCR). Patients and Methods: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025111099). A systematic search was done in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library until the end of July 2025. This review included all diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated UWF retinal imaging for the detection and staging of SCR compared to DFE. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2 tool. Results were synthesized narratively following SWiM (Synthesis Without Meta-analysis) guidelines using ranges of estimates and direction of effect. Results: Three studies were included in the review, comprising 299 patients and 596 eyes. Two studies reported quantitative diagnostic accuracy data. For the non-proliferative sickle cell retinopathy (NPSCR), UWF demonstrated a sensitivity of 75-85% and a specificity of 62-87%. DFE demonstrated lower sensitivity (60-67%), yet it had slightly higher specificity (88% to 91%). For the proliferative sickle cell retinopathy (PSCR), UWF demonstrated a high diagnostic efficacy, with sensitivity (69-90%) and specificity (78-100%). DFE demonstrated lower sensitivity (52-53%), while its specificity was notably higher (96-98%). Across all included studies, the direction of effect consistently favored UWF imaging, which detected a higher proportion of proliferative disease and advanced Goldberg stages than DFE. Conclusion: UWF imaging can be a powerful tool for early detection and monitoring of SCR with a consistently higher sensitivity than DFE, particularly at proliferative stages. This could ultimately reduce vision loss and prevent complications by identifying patients who require early intervention. However, results are limited by the small number of available studies and reliance on narrative synthesis. Further high-quality prospective studies are required to confirm the clinical impact and role of UWF imaging in routine screening for SCR.
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.