ReviewCureus2026
Real-World Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Diabetic Retinopathy Screening: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) remains a leading cause of preventable blindness worldwide, and timely screening is essential for early detection and intervention. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning, has emerged as a promising tool for automated diabetic retinopathy screening. This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic performance and real-world applicability of AI-based systems across diverse clinical settings. A systematic search of PubMed, Excerpta Medica database (Embase), and the Cochrane Library was conducted, supplemented by screening of Google Scholar, with study selection performed in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies were included if they assessed AI systems for diabetic retinopathy detection using fundus-based retinal imaging and reported diagnostic accuracy outcomes. A total of 30 studies published between 2016 and 2025 were included. Across studies, AI systems demonstrated consistently high diagnostic performance, with most reporting sensitivities above 85% and specificities above 80%. Large-scale and real-world studies confirmed the feasibility of implementing AI in national and community screening programmes. Additionally, smartphone-based and handheld imaging systems demonstrated promising potential for expanding screening access in resource-limited settings. Despite these encouraging findings, variability between AI systems and study designs highlights the need for external validation and standardisation prior to widespread clinical adoption. AI has significant potential to enhance screening efficiency and accessibility, but further research is required to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes and integration into healthcare systems.
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.