You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 125 No. 7, July 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (3)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Pediatric Ophthalmology
 •Retinal/ Chorioretinal Disorders
 •Diagnosis
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

It's Plus Disease, Isn't It?

Dale L. Phelps, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(7):963-964.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Chiang and colleagues1 collected valuable, reliable data on between-examiner variations in the diagnosis of plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). They found no "gold standard" in the traditional meaning of an accurate, diagnostic "truth." Twenty-two experts had moderately high disagreement on the diagnosis of plus and pre-plus disease on 34 high-quality, wide-angle fundus photographs. This was disappointing because plus disease is the key defining characteristic in the decision to treat ROP with peripheral ablative surgery. They conclude that the disagreement has important implications for the clinical management, classification, and development of computer-based diagnostic algorithms and telemedicine systems.1

This poses a dilemma for the ROP community and an important point. These results force us to confront plus disease as a continuum from clearly absent to severe rather than as the dichotomous "present/absent." The International Committee on Classification of ROP formally acknowledged this problem by adding a . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTERS

Flawed Study Design in Report on Interexpert Agreement of Plus Disease Diagnosis in Retinopathy of Prematurity
William V. Good, Earl A. Palmer, and Robert J. Hardy
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(5):740.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Flawed Study Design in Report on Interexpert Agreement of Plus Disease Diagnosis in Retinopathy of Prematurity—Reply
Michael F. Chiang, Lei Jiang, Rony Gelman, Yunling E. Du, and John T. Flynn
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(5):740-741.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Interexpert Agreement of Plus Disease Diagnosis in Retinopathy of Prematurity
Michael F. Chiang, Lei Jiang, Rony Gelman, Yunling E. Du, and John T. Flynn
Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(7):875-880.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Flawed Study Design in Report on Interexpert Agreement of Plus Disease Diagnosis in Retinopathy of Prematurity
Good et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:740-740.
FULL TEXT  

Flawed Study Design in Report on Interexpert Agreement of Plus Disease Diagnosis in Retinopathy of Prematurity--Reply
Chiang et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:740-741.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.