In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 16, No. 5 ( 2021-5-6), p. e0251249-
Abstract:
To investigate the reproducibility for the iridocorneal angle evaluations using the pictures obtained by a gonioscopic camera, Gonioscope GS-1 (Nidek Co., Gamagori, Japan). Methods The pragmatic within-patient comparative diagnostic evaluations for 140 GS-1 gonio-images obtained from 35 eyes of 35 patients at four ocular sectors (superior, temporal, inferior, and nasal angles) were conducted by five independent ophthalmologists including three glaucoma specialists in a masked fashion twice, 1 week apart. We undertook the observer agreement and correlation analyses of Scheie’s angle width and pigmentation gradings and detection of peripheral anterior synechia and Sampaolesi line. Results The respective Fleiss’ kappa values for the four elements between manual gonioscopy and automated gonioscope by the glaucoma specialist were 0.22, 0.40, 0.32 and 0.58. Additionally, the respective intraobserver agreements for the four elements by the glaucoma specialist each were 0.32 to 0.65, 0.24 to 0.71, 0.35 to 0.70, and 0.20 to 0.76; the Fleiss’ kappa coefficients for the four elements among the three glaucoma specialists were, respectively, 0.31, 0.38, 0.31, and 0.17; the Fleiss’ kappa coefficients for the angle width and pigmentation gradings between the two glaucoma specialists each were 0.30 to 0.35, and 0.29 to 0.43, respectively. Overall, the Kendall’s tau coefficients for the angle gradings reflected the positive correlations in the evaluations. Conclusion Our findings suggested slight-to-substantial intraobserver agreement and slight-to-fair (among the three) or fair-to-moderate (between the two each) interobserver agreement for the angle assessments using GS-1 gonio-photos even by glaucoma specialists. Sufficient training and a solid consensus should allow us to perform more reliable angle assessments using gonio-photos with high reproducibility.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.t006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s008
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.s009
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0251249.r006
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2021
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Permalink