Suppr超能文献

plusoptiX 视力筛查仪所使用的转诊标准比较

A comparison of referral criteria used by the plusoptiX photoscreener.

作者信息

Singman Eric, Matta Noelle, Tian Jing, Silbert David

机构信息

Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore, USA.

出版信息

Strabismus. 2013 Sep;21(3):190-4. doi: 10.3109/09273972.2013.811606.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of 7 different referral criteria used for the plusoptiX photoscreener on the same cohort of children.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of patients presenting to a pediatric ophthalmology clinic who underwent plusoptiX photoscreening as part of a comprehensive examination. We applied multiple referral criteria from previously published studies as well as the manufacturer's criteria in order to calculate specificity, sensitivity, and predictive value differences between the various referral criteria. We compared all criteria to the results of a pediatric ophthalmology examination based upon the 2003 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) criteria, as well as the newly accepted revision of the AAPOS referral criteria.

RESULTS

109 children were examined with a thorough pediatric ophthalmic exam and with the plusoptiX photoscreener. Of these, 58 (53%) were confirmed to demonstrate amblyopia risk factors, according to 2003 AAPOS criteria. The plusoptiX referral criteria were adjusted to match 7 different published plusoptiX referral paradigms so that the differing referral paradigms could be analyzed for sensitivity and specificity. When comparing the differing plusoptiX referral paradigms to 2003 AAPOS criteria, the sensitivity/specificity of the 7 different paradigms were respectively: Matta/Silbert 98%/80%, Arthur (2) 67%/96%, Arnold 81%/96%, Arthur 81%/92%, PediaVision 80%/94%, plusoptiX 98%/41%, AAPOS 74%/86%. When comparing the 7 differing referral paradigms to the newly approved (2013) AAPOS criteria, the sensitivity/specificity were respectively: Matta/Silbert 98%/68%, Arthur (2) 73%/92%, Arnold 92%/90%, Arthur 86%/85%, PediaVision 90%/92%, plusoptiX 98%/35%, AAPOS 87%/87%.

CONCLUSION

There are multiple referral criteria available for the plusoptiX photoscreener. Screening programs need to evaluate their own requirements with respect to desired sensitivity and specificity and decide on the most appropriate referral criteria for their program. The "Arnold" criteria is the best at maximizing sensitivity and specificity utilizing the 2003 "AAPOS" criteria and the "Arnold" and "PediaVision" were best at maximizing sensitivity and specificity for the newly accepted AAPOS referral criteria. Screening programs will need to decide the level of sensitivity and specificity that they wish to obtain, but for most screening programs the "Arnold" criteria may be preferred.

摘要

目的

评估用于plusoptiX视力筛查仪的7种不同转诊标准对同一组儿童的敏感性、特异性和预测价值。

方法

对到小儿眼科诊所就诊并接受plusoptiX视力筛查作为综合检查一部分的患者进行回顾性病历审查。我们应用了先前发表研究中的多种转诊标准以及制造商的标准,以计算各种转诊标准之间的特异性、敏感性和预测价值差异。我们将所有标准与基于2003年美国小儿眼科与斜视协会(AAPOS)标准以及新接受的AAPOS转诊标准修订版的小儿眼科检查结果进行比较。

结果

109名儿童接受了全面的小儿眼科检查和plusoptiX视力筛查仪检查。其中,根据2003年AAPOS标准,58名(53%)被确认为有弱视风险因素。plusoptiX转诊标准被调整以匹配7种不同公布的plusoptiX转诊模式,以便可以分析不同转诊模式的敏感性和特异性。当将不同的plusoptiX转诊模式与2003年AAPOS标准进行比较时,7种不同模式的敏感性/特异性分别为:Matta/Silbert 98%/80%,Arthur(2)67%/96%,Arnold 81%/96%,Arthur 81%/92%,PediaVision 8

相似文献

2
Critical Assessment of an Ocular Photoscreener.眼部筛查仪的批判性评估
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2018 May 1;55(3):194-199. doi: 10.3928/01913913-20170703-18. Epub 2017 Dec 19.
10
Calibration and validation of the 2WIN photoscreener compared to the PlusoptiX S12 and the SPOT.与PlusoptiX S12和SPOT相比,2WIN照片筛查仪的校准与验证
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2014 Sep-Oct;51(5):289-92. doi: 10.3928/01913913-20140701-01. Epub 2014 Jul 8.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
Field testing of the plusoptiX S04 photoscreener.plusoptiX S04 视力筛查仪的现场测试。
J AAPOS. 2009 Feb;13(1):51-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2008.08.016. Epub 2009 Jan 1.
5
The multi-ethnic pediatric eye disease study: design and methods.多民族儿童眼病研究:设计与方法
Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2006 Aug;13(4):253-62. doi: 10.1080/09286580600719055.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验