Comparison of two reference standards in validating two field mydriatic digital photography as a method of screening for diabetic retinopathy

Scanlon, Peter H and Malhotra, R. and Greenwood, R H and Aldington, S J and Foy, C and Flatman, M and Downes, S (2003) Comparison of two reference standards in validating two field mydriatic digital photography as a method of screening for diabetic retinopathy. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 87 (10). pp. 1258-1263. ISSN 0007-1161

[img]
Preview
Text (Funding: R & D Project Grant: R/21/01.98/Scanlon/R from the South West R&D Directorate)
Comparison of two reference standards in validating.pdf - Published Version

Download (175kB) | Preview

Abstract

AIM: To compare two reference standards when evaluating a method of screening for referable diabetic retinopathy. METHOD: Clinics at Oxford and Norwich Hospitals were used in a two centre prospective study of 239 people with diabetes receiving an ophthalmologist's examination using slit lamp biomicroscopy, seven field 35 mm stereophotography and two field mydriatic digital photography. Patients were selected from those attending clinics when the ophthalmologist and ophthalmic photographer were able to attend. The main outcome measures were the detection of referable diabetic retinopathy as defined by the Gloucestershire adaptation of the European Working Party guidelines. RESULTS: In comparison with seven field stereophotography, the ophthalmologist's examination gave a sensitivity of 87.4% (confidence interval 83.5 to 91.5), a specificity of 94.9% (91.5 to 98.3), and a kappa statistic of 0.80. Two field mydriatic digital photography gave a sensitivity of 80.2% (75.2 to 85.2), specificity of 96.2% (93.2 to 99.2), and a kappa statistic of 0.73. In comparison with the ophthalmologist's examination, two field mydriatic digital photography gave a sensitivity of 82.8% (78.0 to 87.6), specificity of 92.9% (89.6 to 96.2), and a kappa statistic of 0.76. Seven field stereo gave a sensitivity of 96.4% (94.0 to 98.8), a specificity of 82.9% (77.4 to 88.4), and a kappa statistic of 0.80. 15.3% of seven field sets, 1.5% of the two field digital photographs, and none of the ophthalmologist's examinations were ungradeable. CONCLUSION: An ophthalmologist's examination compares favourably with seven field stereophotography, and two field digital photography performs well against both reference standards.

Item Type: Article
Article Type: Article
Subjects: R Medicine > RE Ophthalmology
Divisions: Schools and Research Institutes > School of Sport & Exercise
Research Priority Areas: Sport, Exercise, Health & Wellbeing
Depositing User: Anne Pengelly
Date Deposited: 23 Mar 2016 18:07
Last Modified: 24 Jun 2016 23:21
URI: http://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/3309

University Staff: Request a correction | Repository Editors: Update this record

University Of Gloucestershire

Bookmark and Share

Find Us On Social Media:

Social Media Icons Facebook Twitter Google+ YouTube Pinterest Linkedin

Other University Web Sites

University of Gloucestershire, The Park, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL50 2RH. Telephone +44 (0)844 8010001.