Cited by 12Retinal Imaging and AnalysisOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchRetinal Diseases and Treatments

Clinical Implementation of Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Systems for Diabetic Eye Exams: Considerations for Success

Open access
Wolf, Risa M., Channa, Roomasa, Lehmann, Harold P., Abramoff, Michael D., Liu, T.Y. Alvin·2024·Clinical Diabetes

Abstract

Diabetic eye disease (DED), including diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME), is a complication of diabetes and the leading cause of vision loss among working-age adults in the United States (1-3).Screening for DED can lead to its early identification and treatment, thereby preventing irreversible vision loss (4-7).However, rates of diabetic eye exams for DED screening remain suboptimal, with reported rates in the United States ranging from 11 to 70% (8,9).Autonomous artificial intelligence (AI)-based diabetic eye exams have the potential to increase access to these exams and facilitate the early identification of DED so that timely treatment can be administered to prevent blindness.Autonomous AI systems use a robotic nonmydriatic fundus camera with a built-in AI algorithm to provide feedback to the operator to acquire high-quality fundus photographs for determining the presence or absence of referable DED, with immediate results after image acquisition at the point of care (10-12).The autonomous AI system guides the operator to acquire two color fundus images determined to be of adequate quality using an image quality algorithm, with one each centered on the fovea and the optic nerve, and guides the operator to retake any images of insufficient quality.It is important to note that these systems have been rigorously validated against a prognostic standard to identify DR and DME and do not diagnose other eye conditions.The first autonomous AI diagnostic system (Luminetics-Core, formerly IDx-DR, Digital Diagnostics, Coralville, IA) was de novo-authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2018 after completion of a pivotal trial demonstrating its safety, efficacy, and equity in diagnosing referable DED compared with a prognostic standard outcome (10).In the pivotal trial, the autonomous AI system demonstrated 87% sensitivity and 90% specificity in detecting referable DR and/or DME in adults (10,13).Since this first autonomous AI system was approved, two additional autonomous AI systems have been authorized under the FDA's 510(k) authorization process using it as a predicate, and there are several other autonomous AI systems in different stages of development (11,12).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/cd23-0019

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Eyenuk's commercial launch of EyeArt began in the European Union in 2016 after receiving a Conformité Européenne Mark, when the system was only approved for investigational use in the United States.

    “Eyenuk’s commercial launch of EyeArt began in the European Union in 2016 after receiving a Conformité Européenne Mark, when the system was only approved for investigational use in the United States.”

    From Autonomous Artificial Intelligence in Diabetic Retinopathy Testing—Lessons Learned on Successful Health System Adoption (2026) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Image Acquisition, Imageability, and Diagnosability section discusses EyeArt’s pivotal trial, but not its commercial launch. Searches for the 2016 European Union launch, CE marking, and investigational-use status in the United States found no passage addressing those claims. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [31]Shou BL, Venkatesh K, Chen C,. Predictors for non-diagnostic images in real world deployment of artificial intelligence assisted diabetic retinopathy screening [Abstract]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2022; 63: 1157

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wolf, R. M., Channa, R., Lehmann, H. P., Abramoff, M. D., & Liu, T. Y. A.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • 4Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
Corresponding author
Wolf, Risa M.
Venue
Clinical Diabetes
Published
2023-09-18
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
142-149
ISSN
  • 0891-8929 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-4953
OpenAlex
W4386823554
Cited by
12
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Diabetes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (R01EY033233)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
AI autonomy, diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, diabetic retinopathy screening, point-of-care diagnosis, access to eye care, blindness prevention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review