Reference Standard for Validation of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Screening Algorithms

Read full text
Authors: Amitha Domalpally, Emily Y. Chew, Malvina B. Eydelman, Tiarnán D.L. Keenan, Pearse Andrew Keane, Aaron Y. Lee, Cecilia S. Lee, Eleonora Maries Lad, Jennifer I. Lim, Anat Löwenstein, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, Michael D. Abràmoff
+21 more Emily Chew, Bailey Freund, Mingguang He, Pearce Keane, Tiarnan Keenan, Eleonora Lad, Aaron Lee, Cecilia Lee, Jennifer Lim, Anat Loewenstein, Theodore Smith, Abramoff, Mark Blumenkranz, Emily Chew, Michael Chiang, Malvina Eydelman, Aaron Lee, David Myung, Michael Repka, Joel S. Schuman, Carol Shields
Cited by: 1
References: 27

Abstract

PURPOSE: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based screening models hold promise for identifying individuals with undiagnosed age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in nonspecialist settings. A standardized reference framework for image labeling is needed to enable consistent training, validation, and deployment of AI-based screening algorithms. The goal of the present study was to establish expert consensus on an image-based reference standard for labeling AMD. DESIGN: Modified Delphi consensus study. PARTICIPANTS: Fellowship-trained retina specialists, ophthalmologists, AI specialists, and imaging specialists. METHODS: A prespecified Delphi process was conducted using structured surveys. Over 2 rounds, panelists assessed opinions on existing reference standards, including the Age-Related Eye Disease Study scale and Beckman scale, as well as imaging methods such as color, OCT, and autofluorescence. The surveys also evaluated imaging features of AMD, including drusen, pseudodrusen, and pigment changes, as well as referral criteria. Consensus was defined using a 9-point Likert scale, with predefined statistical thresholds for agreement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement on key elements of a reference standard. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on adopting the Beckman classification as the level 1 reference standard (median score, 8; agreement). OCT use for identifying key AMD features, including drusen, geographic atrophy (GA), and choroidal neovascularization, also reached consensus (median scores, 8.5-9; agreement). Pigment change detection did not reach consensus (median, 7.5; uncertain), and screening age thresholds showed nonconsensus (median, 8; uncertain). Referral thresholds reached consensus, including urgent referral for neovascular AMD and nonurgent referral for GA and intermediate AMD (median, 9; agreement). CONCLUSIONS: This study defined a consensus-based reference standard for labeling AMD from images for AI-based screening. These recommendations are intended to support consistent AI model development and evaluation, while remaining distinct from clinical practice guidelines. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Retinal Imaging and Analysis Retinal Diseases and Treatments Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies

Publication details

Journal / source
Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Volume
133
Issue
7
Pages
865–873
Publication date
17 April 2026
Language
EN