Impact of Artificial Intelligence Assessment of Diabetic Retinopathy on Referral Service Uptake in a Low-Resource Setting: The RAIDERS Randomized Trial

Feasibility and acceptance of artificial intelligence-based diabetic retinopathy screening in Rwanda

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the practical application of artificial intelligence (AI)-based diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening is needed.

METHODS

Consented participants were screened for DR using retinal imaging with AI interpretation from March 2021 to June 2021 at four diabetes clinics in Rwanda. Additionally, images were graded by a UK National Health System-certified retinal image grader. DR grades based on the International Classification of Diabetic Retinopathy with a grade of 2.0 or higher were considered referable. The AI system was designed to detect optic nerve and macular anomalies outside of DR. A vertical cup to disc ratio of 0.7 and higher and/or macular anomalies recognised at a cut-off of 60% and higher were also considered referable by AI.

RESULTS

Among 827 participants (59.6% women (n=493)) screened by AI, 33.2% (n=275) were referred for follow-up. Satisfaction with AI screening was high (99.5%, n=823), and 63.7% of participants (n=527) preferred AI over human grading. Compared with human grading, the sensitivity of the AI for referable DR was 92% (95% CI 0.863%, 0.968%), with a specificity of 85% (95% CI 0.751%, 0.882%). Of the participants referred by AI: 88 (32.0%) were for DR only, 109 (39.6%) for DR and an anomaly, 65 (23.6%) for an anomaly only and 13 (4.73%) for other reasons. Adherence to referrals was highest for those referred for DR at 53.4%.

CONCLUSION

DR screening using AI led to accurate referrals from diabetes clinics in Rwanda and high rates of participant satisfaction, suggesting AI screening for DR is practical and acceptable.

Randomised controlled trials evaluating artificial intelligence in clinical practice: a scoping review

This scoping review of randomised controlled trials on artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical practice reveals an expanding interest in AI across clinical specialties and locations. The USA and China are leading in the number of trials, with a focus on deep learning systems for medical imaging, particularly in gastroenterology and radiology. A majority of trials (70 [81%] of 86) report positive primary endpoints, primarily related to diagnostic yield or performance; however, the predominance of single-centre trials, little demographic reporting, and varying reports of operational efficiency raise concerns about the generalisability and practicality of these results. Despite the promising outcomes, considering the likelihood of publication bias and the need for more comprehensive research including multicentre trials, diverse outcome measures, and improved reporting standards is crucial. Future AI trials should prioritise patient-relevant outcomes to fully understand AI's true effects and limitations in health care.

An Economic Analysis for the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy in Trinidad and Tobago

This is a systematic review of 25 publications on the topics of the prevalence and cost of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in Trinidad and Tobago, the cost of traditional methods of screening for DR, and the use and cost of artificial intelligence (AI) in screening for DR. Analysis of these publications was used to identify and make estimates for how resources allocated to ophthalmology in public health systems in Trinidad and Tobago can be more efficiently utilized by employing AI in diagnosing treatable DR. DR screening was found to be an effective method of detecting the disease. Screening was found to be a universally cost-effective method of disease prevention and for altering the natural history of the disease in the spectrum of low-middle to high-income economies, such as Rwanda, Thailand, China, South Korea, and Singapore. AI and deep learning systems were found to be clinically superior to, or as effective as, human graders in areas where they were deployed, indicating that the systems are clinically safe. They have been shown to improve access to diabetic retinal screening, improve compliance with screening appointments, and prove to be cost-effective, especially in rural areas. Trinidad and Tobago, which is estimated to be disproportionately more affected by the burden of DR when projected out to the mid-21st century, stands to save as much as US$60 million annually from the implementation of an AI-based system to screen for DR versus conventional manual grading.

Concordance of randomised controlled trials for artificial intelligence interventions with the CONSORT-AI reporting guidelines

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for Artificial Intelligence interventions (CONSORT-AI) was published in September 2020. Since its publication, several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of AI interventions have been published but their completeness and transparency of reporting is unknown. This systematic review assesses the completeness of reporting of AI RCTs following publication of CONSORT-AI and provides a comprehensive summary of RCTs published in recent years. 65 RCTs were identified, mostly conducted in China (37%) and USA (18%). Median concordance with CONSORT-AI reporting was 90% (IQR 77-94%), although only 10 RCTs explicitly reported its use. Several items were consistently under-reported, including algorithm version, accessibility of the AI intervention or code, and references to a study protocol. Only 3 of 52 included journals explicitly endorsed or mandated CONSORT-AI. Despite a generally high concordance amongst recent AI RCTs, some AI-specific considerations remain systematically poorly reported. Further encouragement of CONSORT-AI adoption by journals and funders may enable more complete adoption of the full CONSORT-AI guidelines.

Validation of a deep learning system for the detection of diabetic retinopathy in Indigenous Australians

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Deep learning systems (DLSs) for diabetic retinopathy (DR) detection show promising results but can underperform in racial and ethnic minority groups, therefore external validation within these populations is critical for health equity. This study evaluates the performance of a DLS for DR detection among Indigenous Australians, an understudied ethnic group who suffer disproportionately from DR-related blindness.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective external validation study comparing the performance of a DLS against a retinal specialist for the detection of more-than-mild DR (mtmDR), vision-threatening DR (vtDR) and all-cause referable DR. The validation set consisted of 1682 consecutive, single-field, macula-centred retinal photographs from 864 patients with diabetes (mean age 54.9 years, 52.4% women) at an Indigenous primary care service in Perth, Australia. Three-person adjudication by a panel of specialists served as the reference standard.

RESULTS

For mtmDR detection, sensitivity of the DLS was superior to the retina specialist (98.0% (95% CI, 96.5 to 99.4) vs 87.1% (95% CI, 83.6 to 90.6), McNemar's test p<0.001) with a small reduction in specificity (95.1% (95% CI, 93.6 to 96.4) vs 97.0% (95% CI, 95.9 to 98.0), p=0.006). For vtDR, the DLS's sensitivity was again superior to the human grader (96.2% (95% CI, 93.4 to 98.6) vs 84.4% (95% CI, 79.7 to 89.2), p<0.001) with a slight drop in specificity (95.8% (95% CI, 94.6 to 96.9) vs 97.8% (95% CI, 96.9 to 98.6), p=0.002). For all-cause referable DR, there was a substantial increase in sensitivity (93.7% (95% CI, 91.8 to 95.5) vs 74.4% (95% CI, 71.1 to 77.5), p<0.001) and a smaller reduction in specificity (91.7% (95% CI, 90.0 to 93.3) vs 96.3% (95% CI, 95.2 to 97.4), p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The DLS showed improved sensitivity and similar specificity compared with a retina specialist for DR detection. This demonstrates its potential to support DR screening among Indigenous Australians, an underserved population with a high burden of diabetic eye disease.

Artificial intelligence-supported diabetic retinopathy screening in Tanzania: rationale and design of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Globally, diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a major cause of blindness. Sub-Saharan Africa is projected to see the largest proportionate increase in the number of people living with diabetes over the next two decades. Screening for DR is recommended to prevent sight loss; however, in many low and middle-income countries, because of a lack of specialist eye care staff, current screening services for DR are not optimal. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) for DR screening, which automates the grading of retinal photographs and provides a point-of-screening result, offers an innovative potential solution to improve DR screening in Tanzania.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will test the hypothesis that AI-supported DR screening increases the proportion of persons with true referable DR who attend the central ophthalmology clinic following referral after screening in a single-masked, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial. Participants (2364) will be randomised (1:1 ratio) to either AI-supported or the standard of care DR screening pathway. Participants allocated to the AI-supported screening pathway will receive their result followed by point-of-screening counselling immediately after retinal image capture. Participants in the standard of care arm will receive their result and counselling by phone once the retinal images have been graded in the usual way (typically after 2-4 weeks). The primary outcome is the proportion of persons with true referable DR attending the central ophthalmology clinic within 8 weeks of screening. Secondary outcomes, by trial arm, include the proportion of persons attending the central ophthalmology clinic out of all those referred, sensitivity and specificity, number of false positive referrals, acceptability and fidelity of AI-supported screening.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre and Tanzanian National Institute of Medical Research ethics committees have approved the trial. The results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN18317152.

Autonomous artificial intelligence increases screening and follow-up for diabetic retinopathy in youth: the ACCESS randomized control trial

Diabetic retinopathy can be prevented with screening and early detection. We hypothesized that autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) diabetic eye exams at the point-of-care would increase diabetic eye exam completion rates in a racially and ethnically diverse youth population. AI for Children's diabetiC Eye ExamS (NCT05131451) is a parallel randomized controlled trial that randomized youth (ages 8-21 years) with type 1 and type 2 diabetes to intervention (autonomous artificial intelligence diabetic eye exam at the point of care), or control (scripted eye care provider referral and education) in an academic pediatric diabetes center. The primary outcome was diabetic eye exam completion rate within 6 months. The secondary outcome was the proportion of participants who completed follow-through with an eye care provider if deemed appropriate. Diabetic eye exam completion rate was significantly higher (100%, 95%CI: 95.5%, 100%) in the intervention group (n = 81) than the control group (n = 83) (22%, 95%CI: 14.2%, 32.4%)(p < 0.001). In the intervention arm, 25/81 participants had an abnormal result, of whom 64% (16/25) completed follow-through with an eye care provider, compared to 22% in the control arm (p < 0.001). Autonomous AI increases diabetic eye exam completion rates in youth with diabetes.

Barriers to Implementation of Teleretinal Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programs Across the University of California

Aim: To describe barriers to implementation of diabetic retinopathy (DR) teleretinal screening programs and artificial intelligence (AI) integration at the University of California (UC). Methods: Institutional representatives from UC Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Irvine, and Davis were surveyed for the year of their program's initiation, active status at the time of survey (December 2021), number of primary care clinics involved, screening image quality, types of eye providers, image interpretation turnaround time, and billing codes used. Representatives were asked to rate perceptions toward barriers to teleretinal DR screening and AI implementation using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: Four UC campuses had active DR teleretinal screening programs at the time of survey and screened between 246 and 2,123 patients at 1-6 clinics per campus. Sites reported variation between poor-quality photos (<5% to 15%) and average image interpretation time (1-5 days). Patient education, resource availability, and infrastructural support were identified as barriers to DR teleretinal screening. Cost and integration into existing technology infrastructures were identified as barriers to AI integration in DR screening. Conclusions: Despite the potential to increase access to care, there remain several barriers to widespread implementation of DR teleretinal screening. More research is needed to develop best practices to overcome these barriers.

Impact of a short online course on the accuracy of non-ophthalmic diabetic retinopathy graders in recognising glaucomatous optic nerves in Vietnam

PURPOSE

To test an online training course for non-ophthalmic diabetic retinopathy (DR) graders for recognition of glaucomatous optic nerves in Vietnam.

METHODS

This was an uncontrolled, experimental, before-and-after study in which 43 non-ophthalmic DR graders underwent baseline testing on a standard image set, completed a self-paced, online training course and were retested using the same photographs presented randomly. Twenty-nine local ophthalmologists completed the same test without the training course. DR graders then underwent additional one-to-one training by a glaucoma specialist and were retested. Test performance (% correct, compared with consensus grades from four fellowship-trained glaucoma experts), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating (AUC) curve, were computed.

RESULTS

Mean age of DR graders (32.6±5.5 years) did not differ from ophthalmologists (32.3±7.3 years, p=0.13). Online training required a mean of 297.9 (SD 144.6) minutes. Graders' mean baseline score (33.3%±14.3%) improved significantly after training (55.8%±12.6%, p<0.001), and post-training score did not differ from ophthalmologists (58.7±15.4%, p=0.384). Although grader sensitivity reduced before [85.5% (95% CI 83.5% to 87.3%)] versus after [80.4% (78.3% to 82.4%)] training, specificity improved significantly [47.8 (44.9 to 50.7) vs 79.8 (77.3 to 82.0), p<0.001]. Grader AUC also improved after training [66.6 (64.9 to 68.3)] to [80.1 (78.5 to 81.6), p<0.001]. Additional one-to-one grader training by a glaucoma specialist did not further improve grader scores.

CONCLUSION

Non-ophthalmic DR graders can be trained to recognise glaucoma using a short online course in this setting, with no additional benefit from more expensive one-to-one training. After 5-hour online training in recognising glaucomatous optic nerve head, scores of non-ophthalmic DR graders doubled, and did not differ from local ophthalmologists. Intensive one-to-one training did not further improve performance.

Artificial Intelligence Improves Patient Follow-Up in a Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Program

Purpose

We examine the rate of and reasons for follow-up in an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based workflow for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening relative to two human-based workflows.

Patients and Methods

A DR screening program initiated September 2019 between one institution and its affiliated primary care and endocrinology clinics screened 2243 adult patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes without a diagnosis of DR in the previous year in the San Francisco Bay Area. For patients who screened positive for more-than-mild-DR (MTMDR), rates of follow-up were calculated under a store-and-forward human-based DR workflow ("Human Workflow"), an AI-based workflow involving IDx-DR ("AI Workflow"), and a two-step hybrid workflow ("AI-Human Hybrid Workflow"). The AI Workflow provided results within 48 hours, whereas the other workflows took up to 7 days. Patients were surveyed by phone about follow-up decisions.

Results

Under the AI Workflow, 279 patients screened positive for MTMDR. Of these, 69.2% followed up with an ophthalmologist within 90 days. Altogether 70.5% (N=48) of patients who followed up chose their location based on primary care referral. Among the subset of patients that were seen in person at the university eye institute under the Human Workflow and AI-Human Hybrid Workflow, 12.0% (N=14/117) and 11.7% (N=12/103) of patients with a referrable screening result followed up compared to 35.5% of patients under the AI Workflow (N=99/279; χ2df=2 = 36.70, p < 0.00000001).

Conclusion

Ophthalmology follow-up after a positive DR screening result is approximately three-fold higher under the AI Workflow than either the Human Workflow or AI-Human Hybrid Workflow. Improved follow-up behavior may be due to the decreased time to screening result.

CHILDSTAR: CHIldren Living With Diabetes See and Thrive with AI Review

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) appears capable of detecting diabetic retinopathy (DR) with a high degree of accuracy in adults; however, there are few studies in children and young adults.

Methods

Children and young adults (3-26 years) with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were screened at the Dhaka BIRDEM-2 hospital, Bangladesh. All gradable fundus images were uploaded to Cybersight AI for interpretation. Two main outcomes were considered at a patient level: 1) Any DR, defined as mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR or more severe; and 2) Referable DR, defined as moderate NPDR or more severe. Diagnostic test performance comparing Orbis International's Cybersight AI with the reference standard, a fully qualified optometrist certified in DR grading, was assessed using the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUC-PR), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values.

Results

Among 1274 participants (53.1% female, mean age 16.7 years), 19.4% (n = 247) had any DR according to AI. For referable DR, 2.35% (n = 30) were detected by AI. The sensitivity and specificity of AI for any DR were 75.5% (CI 69.7-81.3%) and 91.8% (CI 90.2-93.5%) respectively, and for referable DR, these values were 84.2% (CI 67.8-100%) and 98.9% (CI 98.3%-99.5%). The MCC, AUC-ROC and the AUC-PR for referable DR were 63.4, 91.2 and 76.2% respectively. AI was most successful in accurately classifying younger children with shorter duration of diabetes.

Conclusions

Cybersight AI accurately detected any DR and referable DR among children and young adults, despite its algorithms having been trained on adults. The observed high specificity is particularly important to avoid over-referral in low-resource settings. AI may be an effective tool to reduce demands on scarce physician resources for the care of children with diabetes in low-resource settings.

Artificial intelligence and digital health in global eye health: opportunities and challenges

Global eye health is defined as the degree to which vision, ocular health, and function are maximised worldwide, thereby optimising overall wellbeing and quality of life. Improving eye health is a global priority as a key to unlocking human potential by reducing the morbidity burden of disease, increasing productivity, and supporting access to education. Although extraordinary progress fuelled by global eye health initiatives has been made over the last decade, there remain substantial challenges impeding further progress. The accelerated development of digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) applications provides an opportunity to transform eye health, from facilitating and increasing access to eye care to supporting clinical decision making with an objective, data-driven approach. Here, we explore the opportunities and challenges presented by digital health and AI in global eye health and describe how these technologies could be leveraged to improve global eye health. AI, telehealth, and emerging technologies have great potential, but require specific work to overcome barriers to implementation. We suggest that a global digital eye health task force could facilitate coordination of funding, infrastructural development, and democratisation of AI and digital health to drive progress forwards in this domain.

Artificial intelligence for diabetic retinopathy in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness globally. There is growing evidence to support the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in diabetic eye care, particularly for screening populations at risk of sight loss from DR in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) where resources are most stretched. However, implementation into clinical practice remains limited. We conducted a scoping review to identify what AI tools have been used for DR in LMICs and to report their performance and relevant characteristics. 81 articles were included. The reported sensitivities and specificities were generally high providing evidence to support use in clinical practice. However, the majority of studies focused on sensitivity and specificity only and there was limited information on cost, regulatory approvals and whether the use of AI improved health outcomes. Further research that goes beyond reporting sensitivities and specificities is needed prior to wider implementation.

Artificial intelligence for strengthening healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), AI has been promoted as a potential means of strengthening healthcare systems by a growing number of publications. We aimed to evaluate the scope and nature of AI technologies in the specific context of LMICs. In this systematic scoping review, we used a broad variety of AI and healthcare search terms. Our literature search included records published between 1st January 2009 and 30th September 2021 from the Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Global Health and APA PsycInfo databases, and grey literature from a Google Scholar search. We included studies that reported a quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation of a real-world application of AI in an LMIC health context. A total of 10 references evaluating the application of AI in an LMIC were included. Applications varied widely, including: clinical decision support systems, treatment planning and triage assistants and health chatbots. Only half of the papers reported which algorithms and datasets were used in order to train the AI. A number of challenges of using AI tools were reported, including issues with reliability, mixed impacts on workflows, poor user friendliness and lack of adeptness with local contexts. Many barriers exists that prevent the successful development and adoption of well-performing, context-specific AI tools, such as limited data availability, trust and evidence of cost-effectiveness in LMICs. Additional evaluations of the use of AI in healthcare in LMICs are needed in order to identify their effectiveness and reliability in real-world settings and to generate understanding for best practices for future implementations.