Dataset Information

The Evolution of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programmes: A Chronology of Retinal Photography from 35 mm Slides to Artificial Intelligence.

ABSTRACT: As a third of people with diabetes mellitus (DM) will suffer the microvascular complications of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and therapeutic options can effectively prevent visual impairment, systematic screening has substantially reduced disease burden in developed countries. In an effort to tackle the rising incidence of DM, screening programmes have modernized in synchrony with technical and infrastructural advancements. Patient evaluation has shifted from face-to-face ophthalmologist-based review delivered through community grassroots to asynchronous store-and-forward modern telemedicine platforms commissioned on a nationwide scale. First pioneered with primitive 35-mm slide film retinal photography, the last decade has seen an emergence of high resolution and widefield imaging devices, which may reveal extents of DR indiscernible to the clinician but with implications of potential earlier identification. Similar progress has been seen in image analysis approaches - automated image analysis of retinal photographs of DR has evolved from qualitative feature detection to rules-based algorithms to autonomous artificial intelligence-powered classification. Such models have, relatively rapidly, been validated and are now receiving approval from health regulation authorities with deployment into the clinical sphere. In this review, we chart the evolution of global DR screening programmes since their inception highlighting major milestones in healthcare infrastructure, telemedicine approaches and imaging devices that have shaped the robust and effective frameworks recognised today. We also provide an outlook for the future of DR screening in the context of recent technological advancements with respect to their limitations in current times.

SUBMITTER: Huemer J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7381763 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Evolution of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programmes: A Chronology of Retinal Photography from 35 mm Slides to Artificial Intelligence.

Huemer Josef J Wagner Siegfried K SK Sim Dawn A DA

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 20200720

As a third of people with diabetes mellitus (DM) will suffer the microvascular complications of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and therapeutic options can effectively prevent visual impairment, systematic screening has substantially reduced disease burden in developed countries. In an effort to tackle the rising incidence of DM, screening programmes have modernized in synchrony with technical and infrastructural advancements. Patient evaluation has shifted from face-to-face ophthalmologist-based revi ...[more]

PMID: 32764868

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) system integrated into a handheld smartphone-based retinal camera for DR screening using a single retinal image per eye.MethodsImages were obtained from individuals with diabetes during a mass screening program for DR in Blumenau, Southern Brazil, conducted by trained operators. Automatic analysis was conducted using an AI system (EyerMaps™, Phelcom Technologies LLC, Boston, USA) with one macula-centered, 45-degree field of view retinal image per eye. The results were compared to the assessment by a retinal specialist, considered as the ground truth, using two images per eye. Patients with ungradable images were excluded from the analysis.ResultsA total of 686 individuals (average age 59.2 ± 13.3 years, 56.7% women, diabetes duration 12.1 ± 9.4 years) were included in the analysis. The rates of insulin use, daily glycemic monitoring, and systemic hypertension treatment were 68.4%, 70.2%, and 70.2%, respectively. Although 97.3% of patients were aware of the risk of blindness associated with diabetes, more than half of them underwent their first retinal examination during the event. The majority (82.5%) relied exclusively on the public health system. Approximately 43.4% of individuals were either illiterate or had not completed elementary school. DR classification based on the ground truth was as follows: absent or nonproliferative mild DR 86.9%, more than mild (mtm) DR 13.1%. The AI system achieved sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value percentages (95% CI) for mtmDR as follows: 93.6% (87.8-97.2), 71.7% (67.8-75.4), 42.7% (39.3-46.2), and 98.0% (96.2-98.9), respectively. The area under the ROC curve was 86.4%.ConclusionThe portable retinal camera combined with AI demonstrated high sensitivity for DR screening using only one image per eye, offering a simpler protocol compared to the traditional approach of two images per eye. Simplifying the DR screening process could enhance adherence rates and overall program coverage.

Project description:ImportanceRecent studies have demonstrated the successful application of artificial intelligence (AI) for automated retinal disease diagnostics but have not addressed a fundamental challenge for deep learning systems: the current need for large, criterion standard-annotated retinal data sets for training. Low-shot learning algorithms, aiming to learn from a relatively low number of training data, may be beneficial for clinical situations involving rare retinal diseases or when addressing potential bias resulting from data that may not adequately represent certain groups for training, such as individuals older than 85 years.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether low-shot deep learning methods are beneficial when using small training data sets for automated retinal diagnostics.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study, conducted from July 1, 2019, to June 21, 2020, compared different diabetic retinopathy classification algorithms, traditional and low-shot, for 2-class designations (diabetic retinopathy warranting referral vs not warranting referral). The public domain EyePACS data set was used, which originally included 88 692 fundi from 44 346 individuals. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1 to June 21, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe performance (95% CIs) of the various AI algorithms was measured via receiver operating curves and their area under the curve (AUC), precision recall curves, accuracy, and F1 score, evaluated for different training data sizes, ranging from 5120 to 10 samples per class.ResultsDeep learning algorithms, when trained with sufficiently large data sets (5120 samples per class), yielded comparable performance, with an AUC of 0.8330 (95% CI, 0.8140-0.8520) for a traditional approach (eg, fined-tuned ResNet), compared with low-shot methods (AUC, 0.8348 [95% CI, 0.8159-0.8537]) (using self-supervised Deep InfoMax [our method denoted as DIM]). However, when far fewer training images were available (n = 160), the traditional deep learning approach had an AUC decreasing to 0.6585 (95% CI, 0.6332-0.6838) and was outperformed by a low-shot method using self-supervision with an AUC of 0.7467 (95% CI, 0.7239-0.7695). At very low shots (n = 10), the traditional approach had performance close to chance, with an AUC of 0.5178 (95% CI, 0.4909-0.5447) compared with the best low-shot method (AUC, 0.5778 [95% CI, 0.5512-0.6044]).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest the potential benefits of using low-shot methods for AI retinal diagnostics when a limited number of annotated training retinal images are available (eg, with rare ophthalmic diseases or when addressing potential AI bias).

Project description:To achieve minimum DNA input requirements for next-generation sequencing (NGS), pathologists visually estimate macrodissection and slide count decisions. Unfortunately, misestimation may cause tissue waste and increased laboratory costs. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-augmented smart pathology review system (SmartPath) to empower pathologists with quantitative metrics for accurately determining tissue extraction parameters. SmartPath uses two deep learning architectures, a U-Net based network for cell segmentation and a multi-field-of-view convolutional network for tumor area segmentation, to extract features from digitized H&E-stained formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded slides. From the segmented tumor area, SmartPath suggests a macrodissection area. To predict DNA yield per slide, the extracted features from within the macrodissection area are correlated with known DNA yields to fit a regularized linear model (R = 0.85). Then, a pathologist-defined target yield divided by the predicted DNA yield per slide gives the number of slides to scrape. Following model development, an internal validation trial was conducted within the Tempus Labs molecular sequencing laboratory. We evaluated our system on 501 clinical colorectal cancer slides, where half received SmartPath-augmented review and half traditional pathologist review. The SmartPath cohort had 25% more DNA yields within a desired target range of 100–2000 ng. The number of extraction attempts was statistically unchanged between cohorts. The SmartPath system recommended fewer slides to scrape for large tissue sections, saving tissue in these cases. Conversely, SmartPath recommended more slides to scrape for samples with scant tissue sections, especially those with degraded DNA, helping prevent costly re-extraction due to insufficient extraction yield. A statistical analysis was performed to measure the impact of covariates on the results, offering insights on how to improve future applications of SmartPath. With these improvements, AI-augmented histopathologic review has the potential to decrease tissue waste, sequencing time, and laboratory costs by optimizing DNA yields, especially for samples with scant tissue and/or degraded DNA.

Project description:IntroductionDiabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of preventable blindness in Saudi Arabia. With a prevalence of up to 40% of patients with diabetes, DR constitutes a significant public health burden on the country. Saudi Arabia has not yet established a national screening program for DR. Mounting evidence shows that Artificial intelligence (AI)-based DR screening programs are slowly becoming superior to traditional screening, with the COVID-19 pandemic accelerating research into this topic as well as changing the outlook of the public toward it. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the perception and acceptance of AI in DR screening among eye care professionals in Saudi Arabia.MethodsA cross-sectional study using a self-administered online-based questionnaire was distributed by email through the registry of the Saudi Commission For Health Specialties (SCFHS). 309 ophthalmologists and physicians involved in diabetic eye care in Saudi Arabia participated in the study. Data analysis was done by SPSS, and a value of p < 0.05 was considered significant for statistical purposes.Results54% of participants rated their level of AI knowledge as above average and 63% believed that AI and telemedicine are interchangeable. 66% believed that AI would decrease the workforce of physicians. 79% expected clinical efficiency to increase with AI. Around 50% of participants expected AI to be implemented in the next 5 years.DiscussionMost participants reported good knowledge about AI. Physicians with more clinical experience and those who used e-health apps in clinical practice regarded their AI knowledge as higher than their peers. Perceived knowledge was strongly related to acceptance of the benefits of AI-based DR screening. In general, there was a positive attitude toward AI-based DR screening. However, concerns related to the labor market and data confidentiality were evident. There should be further education and awareness about the topic.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) for the detection of breast cancer in mammography screening practice.DesignSystematic review of test accuracy studies.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1 January 2010 to 17 May 2021.Eligibility criteriaStudies reporting test accuracy of AI algorithms, alone or in combination with radiologists, to detect cancer in women's digital mammograms in screening practice, or in test sets. Reference standard was biopsy with histology or follow-up (for screen negative women). Outcomes included test accuracy and cancer type detected.Study selection and synthesisTwo reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the QUality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A single reviewer extracted data, which were checked by a second reviewer. Narrative data synthesis was performed.ResultsTwelve studies totalling 131 822 screened women were included. No prospective studies measuring test accuracy of AI in screening practice were found. Studies were of poor methodological quality. Three retrospective studies compared AI systems with the clinical decisions of the original radiologist, including 79 910 women, of whom 1878 had screen detected cancer or interval cancer within 12 months of screening. Thirty four (94%) of 36 AI systems evaluated in these studies were less accurate than a single radiologist, and all were less accurate than consensus of two or more radiologists. Five smaller studies (1086 women, 520 cancers) at high risk of bias and low generalisability to the clinical context reported that all five evaluated AI systems (as standalone to replace radiologist or as a reader aid) were more accurate than a single radiologist reading a test set in the laboratory. In three studies, AI used for triage screened out 53%, 45%, and 50% of women at low risk but also 10%, 4%, and 0% of cancers detected by radiologists.ConclusionsCurrent evidence for AI does not yet allow judgement of its accuracy in breast cancer screening programmes, and it is unclear where on the clinical pathway AI might be of most benefit. AI systems are not sufficiently specific to replace radiologist double reading in screening programmes. Promising results in smaller studies are not replicated in larger studies. Prospective studies are required to measure the effect of AI in clinical practice. Such studies will require clear stopping rules to ensure that AI does not reduce programme specificity.Study registrationProtocol registered as PROSPERO CRD42020213590.

Dataset Information

The Evolution of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programmes: A Chronology of Retinal Photography from 35 mm Slides to Artificial Intelligence.

Publications

The Evolution of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programmes: A Chronology of Retinal Photography from 35 mm Slides to Artificial Intelligence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets