pmc logo imageJournal ListSearchpmc logo image
Logo of taosJournal URL: redirect3.cgi?&&auth=0JsC51XZZ2B9VqK5-oWz4ciJpNC5KOVNnEe9Ynk25&reftype=publisher&artid=2258127&article-id=2258127&iid=161825&issue-id=161825&jid=308&journal-id=308&FROM=Article|Banner&TO=Publisher|Other|N%2FA&rendering-type=normal&&http://www.aosonline.org/2001xactions.html
Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2007 December; 105: 73–85.
PMCID: PMC2258127
PLUS DISEASE IN RETINOPATHY OF PREMATURITY: AN ANALYSIS OF DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE
Michael F. Chiang, MD,* Rony Gelman, MD, Lei Jiang, BA, M. Elena Martinez-Perez, PhD, Yunling E. Du, PhD, and John T. Flynn, MD§
From the Department of Ophthalmology (Drs Chiang, Gelman, and Flynn and Mr Jiang) and Department of Biomedical Informatics (Dr Chiang), Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York; Department of Computer Science, Institute of Research in Applied Mathematics and Systems, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City (Dr Martinez-Perez); and Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, New York (Dr Du)
*Presenter.
§AOS member
Abstract

Purpose
To measure agreement and accuracy of plus disease diagnosis among retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) experts; and to compare expert performance to that of a computer-based analysis system, Retinal Image multiScale Analysis.

Methods
Twenty-two recognized ROP experts independently interpreted a set of 34 wide-angle retinal photographs for presence of plus disease. Diagnostic agreement was analyzed. A reference standard was defined based on majority vote of experts. Images were analyzed using individual and linear combinations of computer-based system parameters for arterioles and venules: integrated curvature (IC), diameter, and tortuosity index (TI). Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic areas under the curve (AUC) for plus disease diagnosis were determined for each expert and for the computer-based system.

Results
Mean kappa statistic for each expert compared to all others was between 0 and 0.20 (slight agreement) in 1 expert (4.5%), 0.21 and 0.40 (fair agreement) in 3 experts (13.6%), 0.41 and 0.60 (moderate agreement) in 12 experts (54.5%), and 0.61 and 0.80 (substantial agreement) in 6 experts (27.3%). For the 22 experts, sensitivity compared to the reference standard ranged from 0.308 to 1.000, specificity from 0.571 to 1.000, and AUC from 0.784 to 1.000. Among individual computer system parameters compared to the reference standard, venular IC had highest AUC (0.853). Among linear combinations of parameters, the combination of arteriolar IC, arteriolar TI, venular IC, venular diameter, and venular TI had highest AUC (0.967).

Conclusion
Agreement and accuracy of plus disease diagnosis among ROP experts are imperfect. A computer-based system has potential to perform with comparable or better accuracy than human experts, but further validation is required.