Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Prospective study assesses diagnostic performance in ophthalmology, suggesting AI could optimize healthcare resources.
Objective To assess the diagnostic performance of an interactive platform for ophthalmology in a real-world clinical setting at a tertiary care center. Methods A prospective, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted on consecutive patients referred by general practitioners to the Ophthalmology Department of a third-level University Hospital. Participants underwent automated ocular evaluation using DORIA ( Robotic Ophthalmological Diagnosis through Artificial Intelligence ) including the Eyelib™ Robotized scan (MIKAJAKI, Geneva, Switzerland). Results Of 2,774 referred patients, 2,478 (89.3%) attended their appointments and were examined. Among them, the mean age was 58.5 ± 14.5 years and 1,535 (61.9%) were women. Visual acuity loss with 591 (24.2%) patients and fundus examination 421 (17.3%) patients were the most common referral reasons. Based on DORIA results, ophthalmologists concluded that 807 patients (32.6%) required no further ophthalmological care, 858 (34.6%) needed follow-up with a general ophthalmologist, and 341 (13.8%) were referred to primary care. In a detailed assessment of 2,478 cases, 1,148 (46.3%) were discharged or referred to primary care, while 472 (35.5%) individuals required specialized ophthalmology care. Conclusion The platform might be considered as a valuable solution to the waiting list issue, reducing specialist interventions, and optimizing healthcare resources. Real-world findings suggest potential cost savings and improved patient management. Further studies are necessary to validate its comparative effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armadá-Maresca et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: