Cataract conversion assessment using lens opacity classification system III and Wisconsin cataract grading system

To propose a general conversion approximation algorithm and illustrate its application to two cataract classification systems, the Lens Opacity Classification System III (LOCS III) and Wisconsin Cataract Grading System (Wisconsin system). Lens opacity of 3265 participants (78.7% response rate) aged...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Investigative ophthalmology & visual science 2013-01, Vol.54 (1), p.280-287
Main Authors: Wong, Wan Ling, Li, Xiang, Li, Jialiang, Cheng, Ching-Yu, Lamoureux, Ecosse L, Wang, Jie Jin, Cheung, Carol Y, Wong, Tien Yin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Algorithms
Cataract - classification
Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological
Humans
Lens, Crystalline - pathology
Middle Aged
Photography
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To propose a general conversion approximation algorithm and illustrate its application to two cataract classification systems, the Lens Opacity Classification System III (LOCS III) and Wisconsin Cataract Grading System (Wisconsin system). Lens opacity of 3265 participants (78.7% response rate) aged 40 to 80 years from the Singapore Malay Eye study were assessed both clinically during slit-lamp examination using LOCS III, and via slit-lamp and retro-illumination photographic grading using the Wisconsin system. Collapsed contingency tables were used to convert between the LOCS III and Wisconsin System. The conversion between the two cataract classification systems is affected by the direction of transformation. The conversion algorithm was validated and explained with an application example. An approximate conversion algorithm for any two cataract grading systems was proposed and applied to the LOCS III and Wisconsin system. These findings provide general ways to pool and compare cataract prevalence using different grading systems in epidemiological studies.
ISSN:1552-5783
1552-5783
DOI:10.1167/iovs.12-10657