↓ Skip to main content

Non-Mydriatic Fundus Retinography in Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy: Agreement Between Family Physicians, General Ophthalmologists, and a Retinal Specialist

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in endocrinology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Non-Mydriatic Fundus Retinography in Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy: Agreement Between Family Physicians, General Ophthalmologists, and a Retinal Specialist
Published in
Frontiers in endocrinology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fendo.2018.00251
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonardo Provetti Cunha, Evelyn Alvernaz Figueiredo, Henrique Pereira Araújo, Luciana Virgínia Ferreira Costa-Cunha, Carolina Ferreira Costa, José de Melo Costa Neto, Aline Mota Freitas Matos, Marise Machado de Oliveira, Marcus Gomes Bastos, Mário Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro

Abstract

To determine the level of agreement between trained family physicians (FPs), general ophthalmologists (GOs), and a retinal specialist (RS) in the assessment of non-mydriatic fundus retinography in screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the primary health-care setting. 200 Diabetic patients were submitted to two-field non-mydriatic digital fundus camera. The images were examined by four trained FPs, two GOs, and one RS with regard to the diagnosis and severity of DR and the diagnosis of macular edema. The RS served as gold standard. Reliability and accuracy were determined with the kappa test and diagnostic measures. A total of 397 eyes of 200 patients were included. The mean age was 55.1 (±11.7) years, and 182 (91%) had type 2 diabetes. The mean levels of serum glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c were 195.6 (±87.3) mg/dL and 8.9% (±2.1), respectively. DR was diagnosed in 166 eyes by the RS and in 114 and 182 eyes by GO1 and GO2, respectively. For severity, DR was graded as proliferative in 8 eyes by the RS vs. 15 and 9 eyes by GO1 and GO2, respectively. The agreement between the RS and the GOs was substantial for both DR diagnosis (GO1k = 0.65; GO2k = 0.74) and severity (GO1k = 0.60; GO2k = 0.71), and fair or moderate for macular edema (GO1k = 0.27; GO2k = 0.43). FP1, FP2, FP3, and FP4 diagnosed DR in 108, 119, 163, and 117 eyes, respectively. The agreement between the RS and the FPs with regard to DR diagnosis was substantial (FP2k = 0.69; FP3k = 0.73; FP4k = 0.71) or moderate (FP1k = 0.56). As for DR severity, the agreement between the FPs and the RS was substantial (FP2k = 0.66; FP3k = 069; FP4k = 0.64) or moderate (FP1k = 0.51). Agreement between the FPs and the RS with regard to macular edema was fair (FP1k = 0.33; FP2k = 0.39; FP3k = 0.37) or moderate (FP4k = 0.51). Non-mydriatic fundus retinography was shown to be useful in DR screening in the primary health-care setting. FPs made assessments with good levels of agreement with an RS. Non-mydriatic fundus retinography associated with appropriate general physicians training is essential for the DR screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 5 7%
Other 4 5%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 29 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 36%
Computer Science 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 33 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,240,032
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#4,027
of 13,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,010
of 344,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#93
of 219 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 219 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.