| Title |
Training time and quality of smartphone-based anterior segment screening in rural India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s134656 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cassie A Ludwig, Megan R Newsom, Alexandre Jais, David J Myung, Somasheila I Murthy, Robert T Chang |
| Abstract |
We aimed at evaluating the ability of individuals without ophthalmologic training to quickly capture high-quality images of the cornea by using a smartphone and low-cost anterior segment imaging adapter (the "EyeGo" prototype). Seven volunteers photographed 1,502 anterior segments from 751 high school students in Varni, India, by using an iPhone 5S with an attached EyeGo adapter. Primary outcome measures were median photograph quality of the cornea and anterior segment of the eye (validated Fundus Photography vs Ophthalmoscopy Trial Outcomes in the Emergency Department [FOTO-ED] study; 1-5 scale; 5, best) and the time required to take each photograph. Volunteers were surveyed on their familiarity with using a smartphone (1-5 scale; 5, very comfortable) and comfort in assessing problems with the eye (1-5 scale; 5, very comfortable). Binomial logistic regression was performed using image quality (low quality: <4; high quality: ≥4) as the dependent variable and age, comfort using a smartphone, and comfort in assessing problems with the eye as independent variables. Six of the seven volunteers captured high-quality (median ≥4/5) images with a median time of ≤25 seconds per eye for all the eyes screened. Four of the seven volunteers demonstrated significant reductions in time to acquire photographs (P1=0.01, P5=0.01, P6=0.01, and P7=0.01), and three of the seven volunteers demonstrated significant improvements in the quality of photographs between the first 100 and last 100 eyes screened (P1<0.001, P2<0.001, and P6<0.01). Self-reported comfort using a smartphone (odds ratio [OR] =1.25; 95% CI =1.13 to 1.39) and self-reported comfort diagnosing eye conditions (OR =1.17; 95% CI =1.07 to 1.29) were significantly associated with an ability to take a high-quality image (≥4/5). There was a nonsignificant association between younger age and ability to take a high-quality image. Individuals without ophthalmic training were able to quickly capture a high-quality magnified view of the anterior segment of the eye by using a smartphone with an attached imaging adapter. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 17% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 31% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 August 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#3,207
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,158
of 326,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#30
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 326,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.