To compare two artificial intelligence (AI)-based Automated Diabetic Retinopathy Image Assessment (ARIA) softwares in terms of concordance with specialist human graders and referable diabetic retinopathy (DR) diagnostic capacity.

Retrospective comparative study including 750 consecutive diabetes mellitus patients imaged for non-mydriatic fundus photographs. For each patient four images (45 degrees field of view) were captured, centered on the optic disc and macula. Images were manually graded for severity of DR as no DR, any DR (mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy [NPDR] or more), referable DR (RDR (more than mild DR)), or sight-threatening DR (severe NPDR or more severe disease and/or clinically significant diabetic macular edema [CSDME]). IDx-DR and MONA DR output was compared with manual grading and with each other.

Total sample size was 750 patients, of which 55 were excluded due to ungradable images. Out of the remaining 695 patients 522 (75%) were considered as having no DR by manual consensus grading, and 106 (15%) as having RDR. Agreement between raters varied between moderate to substantial. IDx-DR showed moderate agreement with human grading (k = 0.4285) while MONA DR had substantial agreement (k = 0.6797). Out of 106 patients with a ground truth of RDR, IDx-DR identified 105 and MONA DR identified 99. The sensitivity and specificity rates for RDR detection of IDx-DR were 99.1 and 71.5% compared with MONA DR of 93.4 and 89.3% respectively. Of note, both ARIAs had 100% sensitivity for the detection of STDR.

Both ARIAs performed well in this study population, both with sensitivity for RDR screening over 90%, with IDx-DR showing higher sensitivity and MONA DR higher specificity. MONA DR showed superior agreement with human certified graders.

The eye provides novel insights into general health, as well as pathogenesis and development of systemic diseases. In the past decade, growing evidence has demonstrated that the eye's structure and function mirror multiple systemic health conditions, especially in cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative disorders, and kidney impairments. This has given rise to the field of oculomics-the application of ophthalmic biomarkers to understand mechanisms, detect and predict disease. The development of this field has been accelerated by three major advances: 1) the availability and widespread clinical adoption of high-resolution and non-invasive ophthalmic imaging ("hardware"); 2) the availability of large studies to interrogate associations ("big data"); 3) the development of novel analytical methods, including artificial intelligence (AI) ("software"). Oculomics offers an opportunity to enhance our understanding of the interplay between the eye and the body, while supporting development of innovative diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic tools. These advances have been further accelerated by developments in AI, coupled with large-scale linkage datasets linking ocular imaging data with systemic health data. Oculomics also enables the detection, screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of many systemic health conditions. Furthermore, oculomics with AI allows prediction of the risk of systemic diseases, enabling risk stratification, opening up new avenues for prevention or individualized risk prediction and prevention, facilitating personalized medicine. In this review, we summarise current concepts and evidence in the field of oculomics, highlighting the progress that has been made, remaining challenges, and the opportunities for future research.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss worldwide, making early detection critical to prevent blindness. IDX-DR, an FDA-approved autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) system, has emerged as an innovative solution to improve access to DR screening. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of IDX-DR in detecting diabetic retinopathy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, identifying studies published through October 5, 2024. Studies involving adult patients with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes and reporting diagnostic metrics such as sensitivity and specificity were included. The primary outcomes were pooled sensitivity and specificity of IDX-DR. A bivariate random-effects model was used for meta-analysis, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were generated to assess diagnostic performance. Statistical analyses were performed using MetaDisc software version 2.0.

Thirteen studies involving 13,233 participants met the inclusion criteria. IDX-DR's pooled sensitivity was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.82-0.99), and its pooled specificity was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.95). The SROC curve confirmed IDX-DR's high diagnostic accuracy in detecting diabetic retinopathy across various clinical environments. The AUC value of 0.95 demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity, indicating a robust diagnostic performance for IDX-DR in detecting diabetic retinopathy.

IDX-DR is a highly effective diagnostic tool for diabetic retinopathy screening, with robust sensitivity and good specificity. Its integration into clinical practice, especially in resource-limited settings, can potentially improve early detection and reduce vision loss. However, careful implementation is needed to address challenges such as over-diagnosis and ensure the tool complements clinical judgment. Future studies should explore the long-term impacts of AI-based screening and address ethical considerations surrounding its use.

Since its beginnings in the 1970s, telemedicine has advanced extensively. Telemedicine is now more accessible and powerful than ever thanks to developments in medical imaging, Internet accessibility, advancements in telecommunications infrastructure, exponential growth in computing power, and related computer-aided diagnoses. This is especially true in the field of ophthalmology. With the COVID 19 pandemic serving as a catalyst for the widespread adoption and acceptance of teleophthalmology, new models of healthcare provision integrating telemedicine are needed to meet the challenges of the modern world. The demand for ophthalmic services is growing globally due to population growth, aging, and a shortage of ophthalmologists. In this review, we discuss the development and use of telemedicine in the field of ophthalmology and shed light on the benefits and drawbacks of teleophthalmology.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of preventable blindness and has emerged as a global health challenge, necessitating the development of robust management strategies. As DR prevalence continues to rise, advancements in screening methods have become increasingly critical for timely detection and intervention. This review examines three key advancements in DR screening: a shift from specialist to generalist approach, the adoption of telemedicine strategies for expanded access and enhanced efficiency, and the integration of artificial intelligence (AI). In particular, AI offers unprecedented benefits in the form of sustainability and scalability for not only DR screening but other aspects of eye health and the medical field as a whole. Though there remain barriers to address, AI holds vast potential for reshaping DR screening and significantly improving patient outcomes globally.

The aim of this study is to describe ophthalmological care of adults with diabetes in France and its evolution between 2010 and 2022.

In this study, we used the ESND, a representative permanent random sample of 2/100th of the entire French population. Ophthalmological care was defined by the combination of ophthalmological procedures (fundus examination, color fundus photography, Optical Coherence Tomography..) and/or ophthalmological treatment (intravitreal injection or laser treatment) during the year. Changes in annual rates during the study period were assessed using linear regression models excluding 2020.

From 2010 to 2022, the number of adults treated for diabetes in the ENSD increased from 48 329 patients (mean age 65.3 ± 13.0, 46.3% women) to 68 397 patients (mean age 67.0 ± 13.2, 44.8% women). Among them, the annual rate of ophthalmological care was stable (46.5% in 2010 and 48.5% in 2022) and the difference was not significant (β = 0.10% per year, p = 0.11). The yearly ophthalmological treatment rate increased significantly (3.3% in 2010 and 5.3% in 2022, β = 0.2% per year, p < 0.0001). Rates were lower during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020.Women, individuals aged between 66-80 years, those living in the least deprived areas and those treated with combined insulin and non-insulin treatment had higher yearly ophthalmological care rate.

In this large nationwide representative study with recent and updated data, although ophthalmological treatment rate has increased over the decade mainly due to intravitreal injections, less than half of the diabetic patients receive yearly ophthalmological care.

This study explores the hands-on experiences and perspectives of general practice staff regarding the feasibility of conducting artificial intelligence-assisted (AI-assisted) diabetic retinopathy screenings (DRS) in general practice settings.

The screenings were tested in 12 general practices in the North Denmark Region and were conducted as part of daily care routines over ~4 weeks. Subsequently, 21 staff members involved in the DRS were interviewed.

Thematic analysis generated four main themes: (1) Experiences with DRS in daily practice, (2) Effective DRS implementation in general practice in the future, (3) Trust and approval of AI-assisted DRS in general practice, and (4) Implications of DRS in general practice. The findings suggest that general practice staff recognise the potential for AI-assisted DRS to be integrated into their clinical workflows. However, they also emphasise the importance of addressing both practical and systemic factors to ensure successful implementation of DRS within the general practice setting.

Focusing on the practical experiences and perspectives of general practice staff, this study lays the groundwork for future research aimed at optimising the implementation of AI-assisted DRS in general practice settings, while recognising that the insights gained may also inform broader primary care contexts.

The aim of this study is to explore general practice staff perspectives regarding a teaching concept based on instructional videos for conducting DR screenings. Furthermore, this study aims to investigate the competencies acquired by the staff through this teaching concept.

Qualitative cross-sectional study conducted in general practice clinics in the North Denmark Region.

A teaching concept was developed based on instruction videos to teach general practice staff to conduct diabetic retinopathy screenings with automated grading through artificial intelligence. Semi-structured interviews were performed with 16 staff members to investigate their perspectives on the concept and acquired competencies.

This study found no substantial resistance to the teaching concept from staff; however, participants' satisfaction with the methods employed in the instruction session, the progression of learning curves, screening competencies, and their acceptance of a known knowledge gap during screenings varied slightly among the participants.

This study showed that the teaching concept can be used to teach general practice staff to conduct diabetic retinopathy screenings. Staffs' perspectives on the teaching concept and acquired competencies varied, and this study suggest few adjustments to the concept to accommodate staff's preferences and establish more consistent competencies.

CorneAI, a deep learning model designed for diagnosing cataracts and corneal diseases, was assessed for its impact on ophthalmologists' diagnostic accuracy. In the study, 40 ophthalmologists (20 specialists and 20 residents) classified 100 images, including iPhone 13 Pro photos (50 images) and diffuser slit-lamp photos (50 images), into nine categories (normal condition, infectious keratitis, immunological keratitis, corneal scar, corneal deposit, bullous keratopathy, ocular surface tumor, cataract/intraocular lens opacity, and primary angle-closure glaucoma). The iPhone and slit-lamp images represented the same cases. After initially answering without CorneAI, the same ophthalmologists responded to the same cases with CorneAI 2-4 weeks later. With CorneAI's support, the overall accuracy of ophthalmologists increased significantly from 79.2 to 88.8% (P < 0.001). Specialists' accuracy rose from 82.8 to 90.0%, and residents' from 75.6 to 86.2% (P < 0.001). Smartphone image accuracy improved from 78.7 to 85.5% and slit-lamp image accuracy from 81.2 to 90.6% (both, P < 0.001). In this study, CorneAI's own accuracy was 86%, but its support enhanced ophthalmologists' accuracy beyond the CorneAI's baseline. This study demonstrated that CorneAI, despite being trained on diffuser slit-lamp images, effectively improved diagnostic accuracy, even with smartphone images.

We developed an AI system capable of automatically classifying anterior eye images as either normal or indicative of corneal diseases. This study aims to investigate the influence of AI's misleading guidance on ophthalmologists' responses. This cross-sectional study included 30 cases each of infectious and immunological keratitis. Responses regarding the presence of infection were collected from 7 corneal specialists and 16 non-corneal-specialist ophthalmologists, first based on the images alone and then after presenting the AI's classification results. The AI's diagnoses were deliberately altered to present a correct classification in 70% of the cases and incorrect in 30%. The overall accuracy of the ophthalmologists did not significantly change after AI assistance was introduced [75.2 ± 8.1%, 75.9 ± 7.2%, respectively (P = 0.59)]. In cases where the AI presented incorrect diagnoses, the accuracy of corneal specialists before and after AI assistance was showing no significant change [60.3 ± 35.2% and 53.2 ± 30.9%, respectively (P = 0.11)]. In contrast, the accuracy for non-corneal specialists dropped significantly from 54.5 ± 27.8% to 31.6 ± 29.3% (P < 0.001), especially in cases where the AI presented incorrect options. Less experienced ophthalmologists were misled due to incorrect AI guidance, but corneal specialists were not. Even with the introduction of AI diagnostic support systems, the importance of ophthalmologist's experience remains crucial.

As an alternative to assessments performed by human experts, artificial intelligence (AI) is currently being used for screening fundus images and monitoring diabetic retinopathy (DR). Although AI models can provide quasi-clinician diagnoses, they rarely offer new insights to assist clinicians in predicting disease prognosis and treatment response. Using longitudinal retinal imaging data, we developed and validated a predictive model for DR progression: AI-driven Diabetic Retinopathy Progression Prediction Algorithm (ADRPPA). In this retrospective study, we analyzed paired retinal fundus images of the same eye captured at ≥ 1-year intervals. The analysis was performed using the EyePACS dataset. By analyzing 12,768 images from 6384 eyes (2 images/eye, taken 733 ± 353 days apart), each annotated with DR severity grades, we trained the neural network ResNeXt to automatically determine DR severity. EyePACS data corresponding to 5108 (80%), 639 (10%), and 637 (10%) eyes were used for model training, validation, and testing, respectively. We further used an independent e-ophtha dataset comprising 148 images annotated with microaneurysms, 118 (75%) and 30 (25%) of which were used for training and validation, respectively. This dataset was used to train the neural network Mask Region-based Convolutional Neural Network (Mask-RCNN) for quantifying microaneurysms. The DR and microaneurysm scores from the first nonreferable DR (NRDR) image of each eye were used to predict progression to referable DR (RDR) in the second image. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values indicating our model's performance in diagnosing RDR were 0.963, 0.970, 0.968, and 0.971 for the trained ResNeXt models with input image resolutions of 256 × 256, 512 × 512, 768 × 768, and 1024 × 1024 pixels, respectively. In the validation of the Mask-RCNN model trained on the e-ophtha dataset resized to 1600 pixels in height, the recall, precision, and F1-score values for detecting individual microaneurysms were 0.786, 0.615, and 0.690, respectively. The best model combination for predicting NRDR-to-RDR progression included the 768-pixel ResNeXt and 1600-pixel Mask-RCNN models; this combination achieved recall, precision, and F1-scores of 0.338 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.228-0.451), 0.561 (95% CI: 0.405-0.714), and 0.422 (95% CI: 0.299-0.532), respectively. Thus, deep learning models can be trained on longitudinal retinal imaging data to predict NRDR-to-RDR progression. Furthermore, DR and microaneurysm scores generated from low- and high-resolution fundus images, respectively, can help identify patients at a high risk of NRDR, facilitating timely treatment.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a common complication of diabetes and may lead to irreversible visual loss. Efficient screening and improved treatment of both diabetes and DR have amended visual prognosis for DR. The number of patients with diabetes is increasing and telemedicine, mobile handheld devices and automated solutions may alleviate the burden for healthcare. We compared the performance of 21 artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for referable DR screening in datasets taken by handheld Optomed Aurora fundus camera in a real-world setting.

Prospective study of 156 patients (312 eyes) attending DR screening and follow-up. Both papilla- and macula-centred 50° fundus images were taken from each eye. DR was graded by experienced ophthalmologists and 21 AI algorithms.

Most eyes, 183 out of 312 (58.7%), had no DR and mild NPDR was noted in 21 (6.7%) of the eyes. Moderate NPDR was detected in 66 (21.2%) of the eyes, severe NPDR in 1 (0.3%), and PDR in 41 (13.1%) composing a group of 34.6% of eyes with referable DR. The AI algorithms achieved a mean agreement of 79.4% for referable DR, but the results varied from 49.4% to 92.3%. The mean sensitivity for referable DR was 77.5% (95% CI 69.1-85.8) and specificity 80.6% (95% CI 72.1-89.2). The rate for images ungradable by AI varied from 0% to 28.2% (mean 1.9%). Nineteen out of 21 (90.5%) AI algorithms resulted in grading for DR at least in 98% of the images.

Fundus images captured with Optomed Aurora were suitable for DR screening. The performance of the AI algorithms varied considerably emphasizing the need for external validation of screening algorithms in real-world settings before their clinical application.

Background: Retina fundus images conducted in Greenland are telemedically assessed for diabetic retinopathy by ophthalmological nurses in Denmark. Applying an AI grading solution, in a Greenlandic setting, could potentially improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of DR screening.Method: We developed an AI model using retina fundus photos, performed on persons registered with diabetes in Greenland and Denmark, using Optos® ultra wide-field scanning laser ophthalmoscope, graded according to ICDR.Using the ResNet50 network we compared the model's ability to distinguish between different images of ICDR severity levels in a confusion matrix.Results: Comparing images with ICDR level 0 to images of ICDR level 4 resulted in an accuracy of 0.9655, AUC of 0.9905, sensitivity and specificity of 96.6%.Comparing ICDR levels 0,1,2 with ICDR levels 3,4, we achieved a performance with an accuracy of 0.8077, an AUC of 0.8728, a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 78.8%. For the other comparisons, we achieved a modest performance.Conclusion: We developed an AI model using Greenlandic data, to automatically detect DR on Optos retina fundus images. The sensitivity and specificity were too low for our model to be applied directly in a clinical setting, thus optimising the model should be prioritised.

The global health system remains determined to leverage on every workable opportunity, including artificial intelligence (AI) to provide care that is consistent with patients' needs. Unfortunately, while AI models generally return high accuracy within the trials in which they are trained, their ability to predict and recommend the best course of care for prospective patients is left to chance.

This review maps evidence between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2023, on the perceived threats posed by the usage of AI tools in healthcare on patients' rights and safety.

We deployed the guidelines of Tricco et al. to conduct a comprehensive search of current literature from Nature, PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Dimensions AI, Web of Science, Ebsco Host, ProQuest, JStore, Semantic Scholar, Taylor & Francis, Emeralds, World Health Organisation, and Google Scholar. In all, 80 peer reviewed articles qualified and were included in this study.

We report that there is a real chance of unpredictable errors, inadequate policy and regulatory regime in the use of AI technologies in healthcare. Moreover, medical paternalism, increased healthcare cost and disparities in insurance coverage, data security and privacy concerns, and bias and discriminatory services are imminent in the use of AI tools in healthcare.

Our findings have some critical implications for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3.8, 11.7, and 16. We recommend that national governments should lead in the roll-out of AI tools in their healthcare systems. Also, other key actors in the healthcare industry should contribute to developing policies on the use of AI in healthcare systems.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) poses a major threat to diabetic patients' vision and is a critical public health issue. Imaging applications for DR have grown since the 21st century, aiding diagnosis, grading, and screening. This study uses bibliometric analysis to assess the field's advancements and key areas of interest.

This study performed a bibliometric analysis of DR imaging articles collected from the Web of Science Core Collection database between January 1st, 2000, and December 31st, 2023. The literature information was then analyzed through CiteSpace.

The United States and China led in the number of publications, with 719 and 609, respectively. The University of London topped the institution list with 139 papers. Tien Yin Wong was the most prolific researcher. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. published the most articles (105). Notable burst keywords were "deep learning," "artificial intelligence," et al.

The United States is at the forefront of DR research, with the University of London as the top institution and Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. as the most published journal. Tien Yin Wong is the most influential researcher. Hotspots like "deep learning," and "artificial intelligence," have seen a significant rise, indicating artificial intelligence's growing role in DR imaging.

This study aimed to test an artificial intelligence-based reading system (AIRS) capable of reading retinographies of type 2 diabetic (T2DM) patients and a predictive algorithm (DRPA) that predicts the risk of each patient with T2DM of developing diabetic retinopathy (DR).

We tested the ability of the AIRS to read and classify 15,297 retinal photographs from our database of diabetics and 1200 retinal images taken with Messidor-2 into the different DR categories. We tested the DRPA in a sample of 40,129 T2DM patients. The results obtained by the AIRS and the DRPA were then compared with those provided by four retina specialists regarding sensitivity (S), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy (ACC), and area under the curve (AUC).

The results of testing the AIRS for identifying referral DR (RDR) in our database were ACC = 98.6, S = 96.7, SP = 99.8, PPV = 99.0, NPV = 98.0, and AUC = 0.958, and in Messidor-2 were ACC = 96.78%, S = 94.64%, SP = 99.14%, PPV = 90.54%, NPV = 99.53%, and AUC = 0.918. The results of our DRPA when predicting the presence of any type of DR were ACC = 0.97, S = 0.89, SP = 0.98, PPV = 0.79, NPV = 0.98, and AUC = 0.92.

The AIRS performed well when reading and classifying the retinographies of T2DM patients with RDR. The DRPA performed well in predicting the absence of DR based on some clinical variables.

In healthcare systems in general, access to diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening is limited. Artificial intelligence has the potential to increase care delivery. Therefore, we trained and evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a machine learning algorithm for automated detection of DR.

We included color fundus photographs from individuals from 4 databases (primary and specialized care settings), excluding uninterpretable images. The datasets consist of images from Brazilian patients, which differs from previous work. This modification allows for a more tailored application of the model to Brazilian patients, ensuring that the nuances and characteristics of this specific population are adequately captured. The sample was fractionated in training (70%) and testing (30%) samples. A convolutional neural network was trained for image classification. The reference test was the combined decision from three ophthalmologists. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve of the algorithm for detecting referable DR (moderate non-proliferative DR; severe non-proliferative DR; proliferative DR and/or clinically significant macular edema) were estimated.

A total of 15,816 images (4590 patients) were included. The overall prevalence of any degree of DR was 26.5%. Compared with human evaluators (manual method of diagnosing DR performed by an ophthalmologist), the deep learning algorithm achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.98), with a specificity of 94.6% (95% CI 93.8-95.3) and a sensitivity of 93.5% (95% CI 92.2-94.9) at the point of greatest efficiency to detect referable DR.

A large database showed that this deep learning algorithm was accurate in detecting referable DR. This finding aids to universal healthcare systems like Brazil, optimizing screening processes and can serve as a tool for improving DR screening, making it more agile and expanding care access.

Background: In diabetic retinopathy, early detection and intervention are crucial in preventing vision loss and improving patient outcomes. In the era of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, new promising diagnostic tools have emerged. The IDX-DR machine (Digital Diagnostics, Coralville, IA, USA) represents a diagnostic tool that combines advanced imaging techniques, AI algorithms, and deep learning methodologies to identify and classify diabetic retinopathy. Methods: All patients that participated in our AI-based DR screening were considered for this study. For this study, all retinal images were additionally reviewed retrospectively by two experienced retinal specialists. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for the IDX-DR machine compared to the graders' responses. Results: We included a total of 2282 images from 1141 patients who were screened between January 2021 and January 2023 at the Jules Gonin Eye Hospital in Lausanne, Switzerland. Sensitivity was calculated to be 100% for 'no DR', 'mild DR', and 'moderate DR'. Specificity for no DR', 'mild DR', 'moderate DR', and 'severe DR' was calculated to be, respectively, 78.4%, 81.2%, 93.4%, and 97.6%. PPV was calculated to be, respectively, 36.7%, 24.6%, 1.4%, and 0%. NPV was calculated to be 100% for each category. Accuracy was calculated to be higher than 80% for 'no DR', 'mild DR', and 'moderate DR'. Conclusions: In this study, based in Jules Gonin Eye Hospital in Lausanne, we compared the autonomous diagnostic AI system of the IDX-DR machine detecting diabetic retinopathy to human gradings established by two experienced retinal specialists. Our results showed that the ID-x DR machine constantly overestimates the DR stages, thus permitting the clinicians to fully trust negative results delivered by the screening software. Nevertheless, all fundus images classified as 'mild DR' or greater should always be controlled by a specialist in order to assert whether the predicted stage is truly present.

Diabetic eye disease (DED) is a leading cause of blindness in the world. Annual DED testing is recommended for adults with diabetes, but adherence to this guideline has historically been low. In 2020, Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM) began deploying autonomous AI for DED testing. In this study, we aimed to determine whether autonomous AI implementation was associated with increased adherence to annual DED testing, and how this differed across patient populations. JHM primary care sites were categorized as "non-AI" (no autonomous AI deployment) or "AI-switched" (autonomous AI deployment by 2021). We conducted a propensity score weighting analysis to compare change in adherence rates from 2019 to 2021 between non-AI and AI-switched sites. Our study included all adult patients with diabetes (>17,000) managed within JHM and has three major findings. First, AI-switched sites experienced a 7.6 percentage point greater increase in DED testing than non-AI sites from 2019 to 2021 (p < 0.001). Second, the adherence rate for Black/African Americans increased by 12.2 percentage points within AI-switched sites but decreased by 0.6% points within non-AI sites (p < 0.001), suggesting that autonomous AI deployment improved access to retinal evaluation for historically disadvantaged populations. Third, autonomous AI is associated with improved health equity, e.g. the adherence rate gap between Asian Americans and Black/African Americans shrank from 15.6% in 2019 to 3.5% in 2021. In summary, our results from real-world deployment in a large integrated healthcare system suggest that autonomous AI is associated with improvement in overall DED testing adherence, patient access, and health equity.

(1) Underlying Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is the primary cause of poor vision in young adults. There are automatic image reading systems that can aid screening for DR. (2) Methods: Using our automatic reading system we have counted the number of microaneurysms and hemorrhages in the four quadrants of the ETDRS grid and evaluated the differences between them according to the type of DR. The study was carried out using data from two different databases, MESSIDOR and MIRADATASET. (3) Results: The majority of microaneurysms and hemorrhages are found in the temporal and inferior quadrants of the ETDRS grid. Differences are significant with respect to the other two quadrants at p < 0.001. Differences between the type of DR show that severe-DR has a greater number of microaneurysms and hemorrhages in the temporal and inferior quadrant, being significant at p < 0.001. (4) Conclusions: The count of microaneurysms and hemorrhages is higher in the temporal and inferior quadrants in all types of DR, and those differences are more important in the case of severe-DR.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have demonstrated impressive performance across a variety of clinical tasks. However, notoriously, sometimes these systems are "black boxes." The initial response in the literature was a demand for "explainable AI." However, recently, several authors have suggested that making AI more explainable or "interpretable" is likely to be at the cost of the accuracy of these systems and that prioritizing interpretability in medical AI may constitute a "lethal prejudice." In this paper, we defend the value of interpretability in the context of the use of AI in medicine. Clinicians may prefer interpretable systems over more accurate black boxes, which in turn is sufficient to give designers of AI reason to prefer more interpretable systems in order to ensure that AI is adopted and its benefits realized. Moreover, clinicians may be justified in this preference. Achieving the downstream benefits from AI is critically dependent on how the outputs of these systems are interpreted by physicians and patients. A preference for the use of highly accurate black box AI systems, over less accurate but more interpretable systems, may itself constitute a form of lethal prejudice that may diminish the benefits of AI to-and perhaps even harm-patients.

This scoping review summarizes artificial intelligence (AI) reporting in ophthalmology literature in respect to model development and validation. We characterize the state of transparency in reporting of studies prospectively validating models for disease classification.

Understanding what elements authors currently describe regarding their AI models may aid in the future standardization of reporting. This review highlights the need for transparency to facilitate the critical appraisal of models prior to clinical implementation, to minimize bias and inappropriate use. Transparent reporting can improve effective and equitable use in clinical settings.

Eligible articles (as of January 2022) from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL were independently screened by 2 reviewers. All observational and clinical trial studies evaluating the performance of an AI model for disease classification of ophthalmic conditions were included. Studies were evaluated for reporting of parameters derived from reporting guidelines (CONSORT-AI, MI-CLAIM) and our previously published editorial on model cards. The reporting of these factors, which included basic model and dataset details (source, demographics), and prospective validation outcomes, were summarized.

Thirty-seven prospective validation studies were included in the scoping review. Eleven additional associated training and/or retrospective validation studies were included if this information could not be determined from the primary articles. These 37 studies validated 27 unique AI models; multiple studies evaluated the same algorithms (EyeArt, IDx-DR, and Medios AI). Details of model development were variably reported; 18 of 27 models described training dataset annotation and 10 of 27 studies reported training data distribution. Demographic information of training data was rarely reported; 7 of the 27 unique models reported age and gender and only 2 reported race and/or ethnicity. At the level of prospective clinical validation, age and gender of populations was more consistently reported (29 and 28 of 37 studies, respectively), but only 9 studies reported race and/or ethnicity data. Scope of use was difficult to discern for the majority of models. Fifteen studies did not state or imply primary users.

Our scoping review demonstrates variable reporting of information related to both model development and validation. The intention of our study was not to assess the quality of the factors we examined, but to characterize what information is, and is not, regularly reported. Our results suggest the need for greater transparency in the reporting of information necessary to determine the appropriateness and fairness of these tools prior to clinical use.

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in community in Binh Dinh Province in Vietnam.

This retrospective, descriptive, cross-sectional study assessed the DR screening efficacy of EyeArt system v2.0 by analyzing 2332 nonmydriatic digital fundus pictures of 583 diabetic patients from hospitals and health centers in Binh Dinh province. First, we selected thirty patients with 120 digital fundus pictures to perform the Kappa index by two eye doctors who would be responsible for the DR clinical feature evaluation and DR severity scale classification. Second, all digital fundus pictures were coded and then sent to the two above-mentioned eye doctors for the evaluation and classifications according to the International Committee of Ophthalmology's guidelines. Finally, DR severity scales with EyeArt were compared with those by eye doctors as a reference standard for EyeArt's effectiveness. All the data were analyzed using the SPSS software version 20.0. Values (with confidence interval 95%) of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated according to DR state, referable or not and vision-threatening DR state or not. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The sensitivity and specificity of EyeArt for DR screening were 94.1% and 87.2%. The sensitivity and specificity for referable DR and vision-threatening DR were 96.6%, 90.1%, and 100.0%, 92.2%. Accuracy for DR screening, referable DR, and vision-threatening DR were 88.9%, 91.4%, and 93.0%, respectively.

EyeArt AI was effective for DR screening in community.

An increasing amount of people are globally affected by retinal diseases, such as diabetes, vascular occlusions, maculopathy, alterations of systemic circulation, and metabolic syndrome.

This review will discuss novel technologies in and potential approaches to the detection and diagnosis of retinal diseases with the support of cutting-edge machines and artificial intelligence (AI).

The demand for retinal diagnostic imaging exams has increased, but the number of eye physicians or technicians is too little to meet the request. Thus, algorithms based on AI have been used, representing valid support for early detection and helping doctors to give diagnoses and make differential diagnosis. AI helps patients living far from hub centers to have tests and quick initial diagnosis, allowing them not to waste time in movements and waiting time for medical reply.

Highly automated systems for screening, early diagnosis, grading and tailored therapy will facilitate the care of people, even in remote lands or countries.

A potential massive and extensive use of AI might optimize the automated detection of tiny retinal alterations, allowing eye doctors to perform their best clinical assistance and to set the best options for the treatment of retinal diseases.

The integration of vast, complex biological data with computational models offers profound insights and predictive accuracy. Yet, such models face challenges: poor generalization and limited labeled data.

To overcome these difficulties in binary classification tasks, we developed the Method for Optimal Classification by Aggregation (MOCA) algorithm, which addresses the problem of generalization by virtue of being an ensemble learning method and can be used in problems with limited or no labeled data. We developed both an unsupervised (uMOCA) and a supervised (sMOCA) variant of MOCA. For uMOCA, we show how to infer the MOCA weights in an unsupervised way, which are optimal under the assumption of class-conditioned independent classifier predictions. When it is possible to use labels, sMOCA uses empirically computed MOCA weights. We demonstrate the performance of uMOCA and sMOCA using simulated data as well as actual data previously used in Dialogue on Reverse Engineering and Methods (DREAM) challenges. We also propose an application of sMOCA for transfer learning where we use pre-trained computational models from a domain where labeled data are abundant and apply them to a different domain with less abundant labeled data.

GitHub repository, https://github.com/robert-vogel/moca.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force in medical research and is garnering increased attention in the public consciousness. This represents a critical time period in which medical researchers, healthcare providers, insurers, regulatory agencies, and patients are all developing and shaping their beliefs and policies regarding the use of AI in the healthcare sector. The successful deployment of AI will require support from all these groups. This commentary proposes that widespread support for medical AI must be driven by clear and transparent scientific reporting, beginning at the earliest stages of scientific research.

A review of relevant guidelines and literature describing how scientific reporting plays a central role at key stages in the life cycle of an AI software product was conducted. To contextualize this principle within a specific medical domain, we discuss the current state of predictive tissue outcome modeling in acute ischemic stroke and the unique challenges presented therein.

Translating AI methods from the research to the clinical domain is complicated by challenges related to model design and validation studies, medical product regulations, and healthcare providers' reservations regarding AI's efficacy and affordability. However, each of these limitations is also an opportunity for high-impact research that will help to accelerate the clinical adoption of state-of-the-art medical AI. In all cases, establishing and adhering to appropriate reporting standards is an important responsibility that is shared by all of the parties involved in the life cycle of a prospective AI software product.

In endocrinology, the types and quantity of digital data are increasing rapidly. Computing capabilities are also developing at an incredible rate, as illustrated by the recent expansion in the use of popular generative artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Numerous diagnostic and therapeutic devices using AI have already entered routine endocrine practice, and developments in this field are expected to continue to accelerate. Endocrinologists will need to be supported in managing AI applications. Beyond technological training, interdisciplinary vision is needed to encompass the ethical and legal aspects of AI, to manage the profound impact of AI on patient/provider relationships, and to maintain an optimal balance between human input and AI in endocrinology.

To evaluate mydriatic handheld retinal imaging performance assessed by point-of-care (POC) artificial intelligence (AI) as compared with retinal image graders at a centralized reading center (RC) in identifying diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME).

Prospective, comparative study.

Five thousand five hundred eighty-five eyes from 2793 adult patients with diabetes.

Point-of-care AI assessment of disc and macular handheld retinal images was compared with RC evaluation of validated 5-field handheld retinal images (disc, macula, superior, inferior, and temporal) in identifying referable DR (refDR; defined as moderate nonproliferative DR [NPDR], or worse, or any level of DME) and vision-threatening DR (vtDR; defined as severe NPDR or worse, or any level of center-involving DME [ciDME]). Reading center evaluation of the 5-field images followed the international DR/DME classification. Sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) for ungradable images, refDR, and vtDR were calculated.

Agreement for DR and DME; SN and SP for refDR, vtDR, and ungradable images.

Diabetic retinopathy severity by RC evaluation: no DR, 67.3%; mild NPDR, 9.7%; moderate NPDR, 8.6%; severe NPDR, 4.8%; proliferative DR, 3.8%; and ungradable, 5.8%. Diabetic macular edema severity by RC evaluation was as follows: no DME (80.4%), non-ciDME (7.7%), ciDME (4.4%), and ungradable (7.5%). Referable DR was present in 25.3% and vtDR was present in 17.5% of eyes. Images were ungradable for DR or DME in 7.5% by RC evaluation and 15.4% by AI. There was substantial agreement between AI and RC for refDR (κ = 0.66) and moderate agreement for vtDR (κ = 0.54). The SN/SP of AI grading compared with RC evaluation was 0.86/0.86 for refDR and 0.92/0.80 for vtDR.

This study demonstrates that POC AI following a defined handheld retinal imaging protocol at the time of imaging has SN and SP for refDR that meets the current United States Food and Drug Administration thresholds of 85% and 82.5%, but not for vtDR. Integrating AI at the POC could substantially reduce centralized RC burden and speed information delivery to the patient, allowing more prompt eye care referral.

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the most common cause of preventable blindness among working-age adults. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the regularity of fundus examinations and risk factor control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on the prevalence and severity of DR. Methods: One hundred and fifty-six T2DM patients were included in this cross-sectional study. Results: In this sample, the prevalence of DR was 46.2%. Patients with no DR mainly did not examine the fundus regularly, while most patients with mild/moderate nonproliferative DR (NPDR) underwent a fundus examination regularly. In 39.7% of patients, this was the first fundus examination due to diabetes, and 67% of them had sight-threatening DR (STDR). Diabetes duration (p = 0.007), poor glycemic control (HbA1c) (p = 0.006), higher systolic blood pressure (SBP) (p < 0.001), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (p = 0.002) were the main predictors of DR. However, the impact of SBP (AOR 1.07, p = 0.003) and DBP (AOR 1.13, p = 0.005) on DR development remained significant even after adjustment for diabetes duration and HbA1c. The DR prevalence was higher in patients with higher blood pressure (≥130/80 mmHg) than in those with target blood pressure (<130/80 mmHg) (p = 0.043). None of the patients with target blood pressure had STDR. The peaks in SBP and DBP were observed in T2DM with DR and the first fundus examination due to diabetes. Conclusions: In this T2DM sample, DR prevalence was very high and strongly related to blood pressure and a lack of regular fundus examinations. These results indicate the necessity of establishing systematic DR screening in routine diabetes care and targeting blood pressure levels according to T2DM guidelines.

Diabetic eye disease (DED) is a leading cause of blindness in the world. Early detection and treatment of DED have been shown to be both sight-saving and cost-effective. As such, annual testing for DED is recommended for adults with diabetes and is a Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measure. However, adherence to this guideline has historically been low, and access to this sight-saving intervention has particularly been limited for specific populations, such as Black or African American patients. In 2018, the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) De Novo cleared autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) for diagnosing DED in a primary care setting. In 2020, Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM), an integrated healthcare system with over 30 primary care sites, began deploying autonomous AI for DED testing in some of its primary care clinics. In this retrospective study, we aimed to determine whether autonomous AI implementation was associated with increased adherence to annual DED testing, and whether this was different for specific populations. JHM primary care sites were categorized as "non-AI" sites (sites with no autonomous AI deployment over the study period and where patients are referred to eyecare for DED testing) or "AI-switched" sites (sites that did not have autonomous AI testing in 2019 but did by 2021). We conducted a difference-in-difference analysis using a logistic regression model to compare change in adherence rates from 2019 to 2021 between non-AI and AI-switched sites. Our study included all adult patients with diabetes managed within our health system (17,674 patients for the 2019 cohort and 17,590 patients for the 2021 cohort) and has three major findings. First, after controlling for a wide range of potential confounders, our regression analysis demonstrated that the odds ratio of adherence at AI-switched sites was 36% higher than that of non-AI sites, suggesting that there was a higher increase in DED testing between 2019 and 2021 at AI-switched sites than at non-AI sites. Second, our data suggested autonomous AI improved access for historically disadvantaged populations. The adherence rate for Black/African Americans increased by 11.9% within AI-switched sites whereas it decreased by 1.2% within non-AI sites over the same time frame. Third, the data suggest that autonomous AI improved health equity by closing care gaps. For example, in 2019, a large adherence rate gap existed between Asian Americans and Black/African Americans (61.1% vs. 45.5%). This 15.6% gap shrank to 3.5% by 2021. In summary, our real-world deployment results in a large integrated healthcare system suggest that autonomous AI improves adherence to a HEDIS measure, patient access, and health equity for patients with diabetes - particularly in historically disadvantaged patient groups. While our findings are encouraging, they will need to be replicated and validated in a prospective manner across more diverse settings.

In the pivotal clinical trial that led to Food and Drug Administration De Novo "approval" of the first fully autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) diabetic retinal disease diagnostic system, a reflexive dilation protocol was used. Using real-world deployment data before implementation of reflexive dilation, we identified factors associated with nondiagnostic results. These factors allow a novel predictive dilation workflow, where patients most likely to benefit from pharmacologic dilation are dilated a priori to maximize efficiency and patient satisfaction.

Retrospective review of patients who were assessed with autonomous AI at Johns Hopkins Medicine (8/2020 to 5/2021). We constructed a multivariable logistic regression model for nondiagnostic results to compare characteristics of patients with and without diagnostic results, using adjusted odds ratio (aOR). P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Of 241 patients (59% female; median age = 59), 123 (51%) had nondiagnostic results. In multivariable analysis, type 1 diabetes (T1D, aOR = 5.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.45-23.40, P = .01), smoking (aOR = 2.86, 95% CI: 1.36-5.99, P = .005), and age (every 10-year increase, aOR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.62-2.77, P < .001) were associated with nondiagnostic results. Following feature elimination, a predictive model was created using T1D, smoking, age, race, sex, and hypertension as inputs. The model showed an area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve of 0.76 in five-fold cross-validation.

We used factors associated with nondiagnostic results to design a novel, predictive dilation workflow, where patients most likely to benefit from pharmacologic dilation are dilated a priori. This new workflow has the potential to be more efficient than reflexive dilation, thus maximizing the number of at-risk patients receiving their diabetic retinal examinations.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a preventable cause of blindness detectable through screening using retinal digital photography. The Irish National Diabetic Retina Screening (DRS) programme, Diabetic RetinaScreen, provides free screening services to patients with diabetes from aged 12 years and older. A technical failure (TF) occurs when digital retinal imaging is ungradable, resulting in delays in the diagnosis and treatment of sight-threatening disease. Despite their impact, the causes of TFs, and indeed the utility of interventions to prevent them, have not been extensively examined.

Primary analysis aimed to identify factors associated with TF. Secondary analysis examined a subset of cases, assessing patient data from five time points between 2019 and 2021 to identify photographer/patient factors associated with TF.

Patient data from the DRS database for one provider were extracted for analysis between 2018 and 2022. Information on patient demographics, screening results, and other factors previously associated with TF were analyzed. Primary analysis involved using mixed-effects logistic regression models with nested patient-eye random effects. Secondary analysis reviewed a subset of cases in detail, checking for causes of TF.

The primary analysis included a total of 366,528 appointments from 104,407 patients over 5 years. Most patients had Type 2 diabetes (89.2%), and the overall TF rate was 4.9%. Diabetes type and duration, dilate pupil status, and the presence of lens artefacts on the camera were significantly associated with TF. The Secondary analysis identified the primary cause of TF was found to be optically dense cataracts, accounting for over half of the TFs.

This study provides insight into the causes of TF within the Irish DRS program, highlighting cataracts as the primary contributing factor. The identification of patient-level factors associated with TF facilitates appropriate interventions that can be put in place to improve patient outcomes and minimize delays in treatment and diagnosis.

To explore the feasibility of artificial intelligence technology based on deep learning to automatically recognize the properties of vitreous opacities in ophthalmic ultrasound images.

A total of 2000 greyscale Doppler ultrasound images containing non-pathological eye and three typical vitreous opacities confirmed as physiological vitreous opacity (VO), asteroid hyalosis (AH), and vitreous haemorrhage (VH) were selected and labelled for each lesion type. Five residual networks (ResNet) and two GoogLeNet models were trained to recognize vitreous lesions. Seventy-five percent of the images were randomly selected as the training set, and the remaining 25% were selected as the test set. The accuracy and parameters were recorded and compared among these seven different deep learning (DL) models. The precision, recall, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values for recognizing vitreous lesions were calculated for the most accurate DL model.

These seven DL models had significant differences in terms of their accuracy and parameters. GoogLeNet Inception V1 achieved the highest accuracy (95.5%) and minor parameters (10315580) in vitreous lesion recognition. GoogLeNet Inception V1 achieved precision values of 0.94, 0.94, 0.96, and 0.96, recall values of 0.94, 0.93, 0.97 and 0.98, and F1 scores of 0.94, 0.93, 0.96 and 0.97 for normal, VO, AH, and VH recognition, respectively. The AUC values for these four vitreous lesion types were 0.99, 1.0, 0.99, and 0.99, respectively.

GoogLeNet Inception V1 has shown promising results in ophthalmic ultrasound image recognition. With increasing ultrasound image data, a wide variety of confidential information on eye diseases can be detected automatically by artificial intelligence technology based on deep learning.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to increase the affordability and accessibility of eye disease screening, especially with the recent approval of AI-based diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening programs in several countries.

This study investigated the performance, feasibility, and user experience of a seamless hardware and software solution for screening chronic eye diseases in a real-world clinical environment in Germany. The solution integrated AI grading for DR, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and glaucoma, along with specialist auditing and patient referral decision. The study comprised several components: (1) evaluating the entire system solution from recruitment to eye image capture and AI grading for DR, AMD, and glaucoma; (2) comparing specialist's grading results with AI grading results; (3) gathering user feedback on the solution.

A total of 231 patients were recruited, and their consent forms were obtained. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve for DR grading were 100.00%, 80.10%, and 90.00%, respectively. For AMD grading, the values were 90.91%, 78.79%, and 85.00%, and for glaucoma grading, the values were 93.26%, 76.76%, and 85.00%. The analysis of all false positive cases across the three diseases and their comparison with the final referral decisions revealed that only 17 patients were falsely referred among the 231 patients. The efficacy analysis of the system demonstrated the effectiveness of the AI grading process in the study's testing environment. Clinical staff involved in using the system provided positive feedback on the disease screening process, particularly praising the seamless workflow from patient registration to image transmission and obtaining the final result. Results from a questionnaire completed by 12 participants indicated that most found the system easy, quick, and highly satisfactory. The study also revealed room for improvement in the AMD model, suggesting the need to enhance its training data. Furthermore, the performance of the glaucoma model grading could be improved by incorporating additional measures such as intraocular pressure.

The implementation of the AI-based approach for screening three chronic eye diseases proved effective in real-world settings, earning positive feedback on the usability of the integrated platform from both the screening staff and auditors. The auditing function has proven valuable for obtaining efficient second opinions from experts, pointing to its potential for enhancing remote screening capabilities.

Institutional Review Board of the Hamburg Medical Chamber (Ethik-Kommission der Ärztekammer Hamburg): 2021-10574-BO-ff.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a major microvascular complication of diabetes, affecting a substantial portion of diabetic patients worldwide. Timely intervention is pivotal in mitigating the risk of blindness associated with DR, yet early detection remains a challenge due to the absence of early symptoms. Screening programs have emerged as a strategy to address this burden, and this paper delves into the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in advancing DR screening in Japan. There are two pathways for DR screening in Japan: a health screening pathway and a clinical referral path from physicians to ophthalmologists. AI technologies that realize automated image classification by applying deep learning are emerging. These technologies have exhibited substantial promise, achieving sensitivity and specificity levels exceeding 90% in prospective studies. Moreover, we introduce the potential of Generative AI and large language models (LLMs) to transform healthcare delivery, particularly in patient engagement, medical records, and decision support. Considering the use of AI in DR screening in Japan, we propose to follow a seven-step framework for systematic screening and emphasize the importance of integrating AI into a well-designed screening program. Automated scoring systems with AI enhance screening quality, but their effectiveness depends on their integration into the broader screening ecosystem. LLMs emerge as an important tool to fill gaps in the screening process, from personalized invitations to reporting results, facilitating a seamless and efficient system. However, it is essential to address concerns surrounding technical accuracy and governance before full-scale integration into the healthcare system. In conclusion, this review highlights the challenges in the current screening pathway and the potential for AI, particularly LLM, to revolutionize DR screening in Japan. The future direction will depend on leadership from ophthalmologists and stakeholders to address long-standing challenges in DR screening so that all people have access to accessible and effective screening.

The changing landscape of medical education has made small-group discussions crucial components. These sessions, including problem-based learning (PBL), case-based learning (CBL), and team-based learning (TBL), revolutionize learning by fostering active participation, critical thinking, and practical skills application. They bridge theory with practice, preparing future healthcare professionals for the dynamic challenges of modern healthcare. Despite their transformative potential, there are challenges in faculty preparation, resource allocation, and effective evaluation. The best practices include aligning discussions with curriculum goals, skilled facilitation, promoting active participation, and robust assessment strategies. Looking ahead, adapting to emerging health trends, ongoing research, and evolving healthcare demands will ensure the continued relevance and effectiveness of small-group discussions, shaping competent and adaptable healthcare providers equipped for the ever-evolving healthcare landscape.

Telemedicine, the use of telecommunication and information technology to deliver healthcare remotely, has evolved beyond recognition since its inception in the 1970s. Advances in telecommunication infrastructure, the advent of the Internet, exponential growth in computing power and associated computer-aided diagnosis, and medical imaging developments have created an environment where telemedicine is more accessible and capable than ever before, particularly in the field of ophthalmology. Ever-increasing global demand for ophthalmic services due to population growth and ageing together with insufficient supply of ophthalmologists requires new models of healthcare provision integrating telemedicine to meet present day challenges, with the recent COVID-19 pandemic providing the catalyst for the widespread adoption and acceptance of teleophthalmology. In this review we discuss the history, present and future application of telemedicine within the field of ophthalmology, and specifically retinal disease. We consider the strengths and limitations of teleophthalmology, its role in screening, community and hospital management of retinal disease, patient and clinician attitudes, and barriers to its adoption.

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.