ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
AI-Augmented Fundus Disease Screening by Non-Ophthalmologist Physicians: A Paired Before-After Study.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Computer-Aided Detection in Biomedical Applications.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screening for retinal disease is increasingly performed by general practitioners and other non-ophthalmologist clinicians in primary care, especially where access to ophthalmology is limited and diagnostic accuracy may be suboptimal. To investigate the role of an automated fundus-interpretation support solution in improving general physicians' screening accuracy and referral decisions, we conducted a paired before-after study evaluating an AI-based decision support tool. Four non-ophthalmologists who have been involved in screen fundus images in clinical practice reviewed 500 de-identified color fundus photographs twice-first unaided and, after a washout period, with AI assistance. With AI support, diagnostic accuracy improved significantly from 82.8% to 91.1% (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.