使用真实世界数据定制基于人工智能的筛查:来自糖尿病视网膜病变的实用见解。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Broder Poschkamp, Liane Kantz, Petra Augstein, Allam Tayar, Lars Kaderali, Martin Busch, Beathe Bohl, Sebastian Paul, Lisa Lüdtke, Marie-Christine Bründer, Daniel Schulz, Hanna Grabow, Elke Gens Dipl, Antonia Müller, Emily Martin, Wolfgang Kerner, Jörg Reindel, Andreas Stahl
{"title":"使用真实世界数据定制基于人工智能的筛查:来自糖尿病视网膜病变的实用见解。","authors":"Broder Poschkamp, Liane Kantz, Petra Augstein, Allam Tayar, Lars Kaderali, Martin Busch, Beathe Bohl, Sebastian Paul, Lisa Lüdtke, Marie-Christine Bründer, Daniel Schulz, Hanna Grabow, Elke Gens Dipl, Antonia Müller, Emily Martin, Wolfgang Kerner, Jörg Reindel, Andreas Stahl","doi":"10.1111/aos.17591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss in middle-aged adults globally. Although artificial intelligence (AI)-based screening tools like IDx-DR (classification) and Thirona RetCAD (regression) have shown high sensitivity in controlled settings, real-world screening faces challenges due to missing or low-quality images and inadequate adaptation to local healthcare needs. The objective was to compare the performance of two AI-based DR screening algorithms (IDx-DR and RetCAD) that analyse non-mydriatic images, against ophthalmologists' mydriatic fundoscopy with image analysis and the impact of customized referral threshold modification ('Greifswald modification') on screening outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This one-centre observational study included 1716 patients with diabetes mellitus (Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00035967). Sensitivity, specificity, the proportion of ungradable images and the reduction in ophthalmologic evaluations were assessed. Customized referral threshold modification was conducted using the Youden Index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 98 patients (5.7%), no images could be acquired, and 35 patients (2.1%) had incomplete image sets for IDx-DR. IDx-DR rejected 438 patients (25.5%) due to image quality, while RetCAD flagged 134 eyes from 120 patients (6.9%) but provided output for all. Among analysable images, sensitivities ranged from 70.4% (RetCAD) to 93.6% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). Including all patients reduced sensitivity from 52.7% (IDx-DR) to 79.9% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). AI screening reduced ophthalmologic exam needs by 47.5% to 78.5%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Real-world DR screening performance of AI algorithms, when including non-analysable patients, can be substantially lower than in controlled studies. The use of regression algorithms enabled the customization of referral thresholds, improving screening accuracy and reducing the clinical burden.</p>","PeriodicalId":6915,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ophthalmologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Customizing AI-based screening with real-world data: Practical insights from diabetic retinopathy.\",\"authors\":\"Broder Poschkamp, Liane Kantz, Petra Augstein, Allam Tayar, Lars Kaderali, Martin Busch, Beathe Bohl, Sebastian Paul, Lisa Lüdtke, Marie-Christine Bründer, Daniel Schulz, Hanna Grabow, Elke Gens Dipl, Antonia Müller, Emily Martin, Wolfgang Kerner, Jörg Reindel, Andreas Stahl\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aos.17591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss in middle-aged adults globally. Although artificial intelligence (AI)-based screening tools like IDx-DR (classification) and Thirona RetCAD (regression) have shown high sensitivity in controlled settings, real-world screening faces challenges due to missing or low-quality images and inadequate adaptation to local healthcare needs. The objective was to compare the performance of two AI-based DR screening algorithms (IDx-DR and RetCAD) that analyse non-mydriatic images, against ophthalmologists' mydriatic fundoscopy with image analysis and the impact of customized referral threshold modification ('Greifswald modification') on screening outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This one-centre observational study included 1716 patients with diabetes mellitus (Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00035967). Sensitivity, specificity, the proportion of ungradable images and the reduction in ophthalmologic evaluations were assessed. Customized referral threshold modification was conducted using the Youden Index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 98 patients (5.7%), no images could be acquired, and 35 patients (2.1%) had incomplete image sets for IDx-DR. IDx-DR rejected 438 patients (25.5%) due to image quality, while RetCAD flagged 134 eyes from 120 patients (6.9%) but provided output for all. Among analysable images, sensitivities ranged from 70.4% (RetCAD) to 93.6% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). Including all patients reduced sensitivity from 52.7% (IDx-DR) to 79.9% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). AI screening reduced ophthalmologic exam needs by 47.5% to 78.5%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Real-world DR screening performance of AI algorithms, when including non-analysable patients, can be substantially lower than in controlled studies. The use of regression algorithms enabled the customization of referral thresholds, improving screening accuracy and reducing the clinical burden.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Ophthalmologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.17591\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ophthalmologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.17591","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)是全球中年人视力丧失的主要原因。尽管基于人工智能(AI)的筛查工具,如IDx-DR(分类)和Thirona RetCAD(回归)在受控环境中显示出高灵敏度,但由于缺少或低质量的图像以及对当地医疗保健需求的适应不足,实际筛查面临着挑战。目的是比较两种基于人工智能的DR筛查算法(IDx-DR和RetCAD)的性能,这两种算法分析非散瞳图像,与眼科医生的散瞳眼底镜图像分析和定制转诊阈值修改(“Greifswald修改”)对筛查结果的影响。方法:这项单中心观察性研究纳入了1716例糖尿病患者(临床试验注册号:DRKS00035967)。评估了灵敏度、特异性、不可分级图像的比例和眼科评估的减少。使用约登指数进行自定义推荐阈值修改。结果:98例(5.7%)患者无法获得图像,35例(2.1%)患者IDx-DR图像集不完整。由于图像质量原因,IDx-DR拒绝了438名患者(25.5%),而RetCAD标记了120名患者中的134只眼睛(6.9%),但提供了所有患者的输出。在可分析的图像中,灵敏度从70.4% (RetCAD)到93.6% (Greifswald修饰的RetCAD)。纳入所有患者后,敏感性从52.7% (IDx-DR)降至79.9% (Greifswald修饰的RetCAD)。人工智能筛查将眼科检查需求减少了47.5%至78.5%。结论:人工智能算法在包括不可分析患者时,在现实世界中的DR筛选性能可能大大低于对照研究。使用回归算法可以定制转诊阈值,提高筛查准确性并减轻临床负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Customizing AI-based screening with real-world data: Practical insights from diabetic retinopathy.

Purpose: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss in middle-aged adults globally. Although artificial intelligence (AI)-based screening tools like IDx-DR (classification) and Thirona RetCAD (regression) have shown high sensitivity in controlled settings, real-world screening faces challenges due to missing or low-quality images and inadequate adaptation to local healthcare needs. The objective was to compare the performance of two AI-based DR screening algorithms (IDx-DR and RetCAD) that analyse non-mydriatic images, against ophthalmologists' mydriatic fundoscopy with image analysis and the impact of customized referral threshold modification ('Greifswald modification') on screening outcomes.

Methods: This one-centre observational study included 1716 patients with diabetes mellitus (Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00035967). Sensitivity, specificity, the proportion of ungradable images and the reduction in ophthalmologic evaluations were assessed. Customized referral threshold modification was conducted using the Youden Index.

Results: In 98 patients (5.7%), no images could be acquired, and 35 patients (2.1%) had incomplete image sets for IDx-DR. IDx-DR rejected 438 patients (25.5%) due to image quality, while RetCAD flagged 134 eyes from 120 patients (6.9%) but provided output for all. Among analysable images, sensitivities ranged from 70.4% (RetCAD) to 93.6% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). Including all patients reduced sensitivity from 52.7% (IDx-DR) to 79.9% (RetCAD with Greifswald modification). AI screening reduced ophthalmologic exam needs by 47.5% to 78.5%.

Conclusions: Real-world DR screening performance of AI algorithms, when including non-analysable patients, can be substantially lower than in controlled studies. The use of regression algorithms enabled the customization of referral thresholds, improving screening accuracy and reducing the clinical burden.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Ophthalmologica
Acta Ophthalmologica 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
433
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Acta Ophthalmologica is published on behalf of the Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation and is the official scientific publication of the following societies: The Danish Ophthalmological Society, The Finnish Ophthalmological Society, The Icelandic Ophthalmological Society, The Norwegian Ophthalmological Society and The Swedish Ophthalmological Society, and also the European Association for Vision and Eye Research (EVER). Acta Ophthalmologica publishes clinical and experimental original articles, reviews, editorials, educational photo essays (Diagnosis and Therapy in Ophthalmology), case reports and case series, letters to the editor and doctoral theses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信