KLP 8_Manuscriptjurnal reading tes_ .pptx

Jurnal

1. Review and Journal Appraisal Review by : Date : ASVIKA ANIS ANWAR ETHNIC VARIATION IN DIABETIC RETINOPATHY LESION DISTRIBUTION ON ULTRA-WIDEFIELD IMAGING DECEMBER 2023 YE HE, ADITYA VERMA, MUNEESWAR G. NITTALA, SWETHA BINDU VELAGA, HOURI ESMAEILKHANIAN, XIAORONG LI, LONG SU, XIAO LI, CHAITRA JAYADEV, IRENA TSUI, PRADEEP PRASAD, AND SRINIVAS R. SADDA

2. JOURNAL REVIEW

3. ABSTRACT Multi- center , retrospective cohort study To evaluate whether the distribution of Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) lesions differs among various ethnicities. DESIGN PURPOSE This research accrued a cohort analysis using 226 eyes with DR. Those was divided by 51 East Asian eyes, 102 South Asian eyes, 30 Caucasian eyes, and 43 Latino eyes which all being evaluated with ultrawide field pseudocolor images. Then, those images were annotated manually for DR lesions and were classified as having predominantly peripheral lesions (PPL) or predominantly central lesions (PCL) using 4 quantitative methods. The percent distribution of PCL to PPL was compared among different ethnicities. METHODS

4. Using a single-field lesion frequency-based method: East Asian eyes more frequently demonstrated a PPL distribution (86.3%) South Asian eyes more frequently demonstrated a PCL distribution (64.7%). These findings were also observed when con- sidering only the subset of treatment-naïve eyes. Furthermore, in treatment-naïve eyes without proliferative DR, the percent distribution of PPL to PCL in East Asian eyes was significantly different when compared to other ethnicities ( P < .0001 South Asian, P = .035 Caucasian, P = .0003 Latino). The majority of patients (60%-78%) in all ethnic groups had moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), and the same difference be- tween East Asian and South Asian eyes was observed in this subgroup. RESULT The distribution of DR lesions appears to vary among different ethnicities. DR lesions tend to be distributed more peripherally in East Asian eyes compared to other ethnic groups, particularly South Asian eyes, which tend to have more central disease. The prognostic implications of these ethnic differences in DR lesion distribution require further investigation. CONCLUSIONS ABSTRACT

5. RESULT In all ethnic groups most had moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) DR lesions tend to be distributed more peripherally in East Asian eyes compared to other ethnic groups, particularly South Asian eyes, which tend to have more central disease. Predominantly peripheral lesion (PPL) distribution of eyes in the East Asian group appears to have multiple PPL fields. When using frequency-based methods, the distribution of PCL vs PPL cases appeared to differ among the various ethnicities, regardless of prior treatment or DR severity 

6. LIMITATION Using retrospective analysis which leads to ascertainment bias Sample size is relatively small Not able to include patients of African origin in this study Study was cross-sectional Which is lead the sample of the data cannot controlled by the researcher. These include the potential confounders or differences between group

7. THESIS DEFENSE Medical Ethics and Codes of Conduct JOURNAL APPRAISAL

8. The title is really enticing and when I tried to look on the internet there is a few journal related with this topic means that this related field need more things to explore. Theres no Corresponding Author writen Abstract (result & conclusion): Not structured in providing results Did not compare the four methods and 4 ethnicities Focus too much on the comparison of the two ethnicitie

9. Were the groups similar and recruited from the same population? Were the exposures measured similarly to assign people to both exposed and unexposed groups? Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?

10. Were confounding factors identified? Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? Were the groups/participants free of the outcome at the start of the study (or at the moment of exposure)? Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way

11. Unclear, not stated on the journal Was the follow up time reported and sufficient to belong enough for outcomes to occur? Was follow-up complete, and if not, were the reasons to loss to follow-up described and explored? Were strategies to address incomplete follow-up utilized? Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

12. This Journal is a good journal where the data has been assessed and measured more than one way, and it leads to have multiple finding that worth to be investigated more on further research. Example: This journal is sharing a really good insight after they mentioned that for East Asian has higher rate of PPL and it connected to the high risk for progression to PDR after 4 years. In addition, the way they inform about the limitation, strength and suggestion is really clear on the conclusion so people who read can understand easily what need to be improve for further research. Lastly, the only thing that lack for this journal is the sufficient data. Data used is not much enough in term of the number and distribution for the ethnic. The Quality of data is also not clear since the writer does not give much detail for it especially when is the period of the data taken for this research. Conclusion

13. THANK YOU