Diagnostic accuracy of non-mydriatic fundus photography as a triage and telemedicine tool for patients with vision loss
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Fundoscopy can be challenging for non-ophthalmologists. For emergency physicians, non-mydriatic fundus photography is superior to other forms of ophthalmoscopy in sensitivity, specificity, and inter-examination agreement. We report on a prospective cross-sectional study evaluating the use of non-mydriatic photography as a triage and telemedicine tool for patients with vision loss in a Canadian emergency setting. METHODS: Images of both eyes were obtained by a non-ophthalmologist using a handheld, non-mydriatic fundus camera and shared with a fellowship-trained ophthalmologist without patient context. The reviewer was asked to (1) select the best photo obtained for each eye and rate image quality on a Likert scale, (2) comment on the presence or absence of fundus abnormalities and (3) provide an opinion on whether findings would have changed patient disposition if available at the time of the initial Emergency Department (ED) exam. RESULTS: Of 57 patients evaluated in the ED for vision loss, 22.8 % had a documented fundus examination. 86.8 % of images were deemed to have acceptable quality (Likert scale≥2). Factors limiting image quality included media opacity, pupillary miosis, photosensitivity, and eyelid/periorbital abnormalities. Of patients with relevant abnormalities, 0 % were identified by emergency physicians. In contrast, 37.5 % of patients with relevant findings were identified on review of images alone (specificity=100 %). CONCLUSIONS: Fundoscopy is infrequently performed in the emergency setting in patients presenting with vision loss. Non-mydriatic fundus photography is a cost-effective method of fundus examination for non-expert examiners and can be reliably used as a telemedicine tool for remote ophthalmology consultation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it