2019
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-018-0332-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Non-physician grader reliability in measuring morphological features of the optic nerve head in stereo digital images

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is possible that further training could have lead to higher accuracy and more agreement across graders, especially given other studies that have shown non-ophthalmologist graders to have higher inter-grader reliability with more extensive training. [19] Despite this, our findings suggest non-ophthalmologist graders might be trained to accurately estimate VCDR using simple visual inspection, although it is important to note that the non-experts with no clinical background did substantially worse than those with clinical experience and interest in ophthalmology, and in some cases, the non-clinical graders demonstrated unacceptable agreement with the reference standard. Indeed, these results provide evidence of the high variability in VCDR grading, especially when done by those with little clinical experience.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…It is possible that further training could have lead to higher accuracy and more agreement across graders, especially given other studies that have shown non-ophthalmologist graders to have higher inter-grader reliability with more extensive training. [19] Despite this, our findings suggest non-ophthalmologist graders might be trained to accurately estimate VCDR using simple visual inspection, although it is important to note that the non-experts with no clinical background did substantially worse than those with clinical experience and interest in ophthalmology, and in some cases, the non-clinical graders demonstrated unacceptable agreement with the reference standard. Indeed, these results provide evidence of the high variability in VCDR grading, especially when done by those with little clinical experience.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…The greater experience and training of glaucoma specialists in the evaluation of the optic disc could, in theory, make the suspicion of glaucoma more accurate. Other studies have seen good intra-and interobserver agreement among ophthalmologists, optometrists, and even nonmedical qualifiers [26][27][28]. In our case, we have models similar to other detection programs that evaluate the retina and also the optic disc, such as in Hong Kong or the UK, where glaucoma specialists [24,29] are not used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…Qualitative phenotypes were obtained using a standardized grading form for 30-degree color stereo disc photos of study subjects, imaged with the Topcon TRC 50EX retinal camera (Topcon Corporation of America, Paramus, NJ, USA). Two non-physician graders were trained by glaucoma specialists to independently complete a standardized form for each pair of color stereo images [ 37 ]. Patients were excluded from analysis if they did not have disc photos or if the photos were deemed too low in quality.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%