, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 437–444 | Cite as

Methodology for retinal photography and assessment of diabetic retinopathy: the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study

  • S. J. Aldington
  • E. M. Kohner
  • S. Meuer
  • R. Klein
  • A. K. SjØlie
  • The EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study Group


We present the methodology for 45‡ retinal photography and detail the development, application and validation of a new system of 45‡ field grading standards for the assessment of diabetic retinopathy. The systems were developed for the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study, part of a European Community funded Concerted Action Programme into the epidemiology and prevention of diabetes (EURODIAB). Assessment of diabetic retinopathy was carried out centrally by a trained reader of colour retinal photographs using the newly-developed system. The system proved to be acceptably accurate, repeatable and relatively simple to apply. It compared well with the recognised ‘gold standard’ 7-field 30‡ stereo photography (assessed using a modified Airlie House classification scheme), against which the new system was validated in a series of 48 eyes. Selection was as a stratified random sample based on clinical retinopathy status: 5, no retinopathy; 25, non-proliferative retinopathy; 16, proliferative or photocoagulated; plus 2, eyes with potentially confounding lesions (vein occlusion). Simple presence of retinal lesions was correctly detected by both systems in 43 of the 48 eyes, giving 100% agreement on detection. Both systems correctly identified the two known cases of confounding vein occlusion. In eyes with diabetic retinopathy (n=41), when severity was expressed in three groups: mild background, moderate/severe background and proliferative/ photocoagulated, at least one grader (out of five) using the new system matched the verified results in 38 out of 41 (93%) eyes and three or more graders matched in 31 (76%) eyes. Individually the five graders' 2-field allocations agreed well with the verified levels (median number of agreements 37, range 28–43). Repeatability was assessed by measures of within and between observer variation using randomly selected samples of 10% (n=252 eyes) and 5% (n=123 eyes) of the main study, respectively, expressed as a resultant kappa value for chance-corrected proportional agreement. Within observer assessment yielded a kappa of 0.85 and between observers a value of 0.83; indicating very good agreement for both measures. The method is particularly useful for large epidemiological studies, in which participating centres have a limited experience in retinal photography.

Key words

Insulin-dependent diabetes diabetic retinopathy retinal photography grading scheme 



Haemorrhages and microaneurysms


Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study


  1. 1.
    The EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study Group (1994) Microvascular and acute complications in insulin dependent diabetes mellitus: the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study. Diabetologia 37: 278–285Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Diabetic Retinopathy Research group (1981) Report 7. A modification of the Airlie House classification of diabetic retinopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 21/2: 244–251Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    The Wisconsin Epidemiologic Study of Diabetic Retinopathy (1984) III. Prevalence and risk of diabetic retinopathy when age at diagnosis is 30 or more years. Arch Ophthalmol 102: 527–532Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (1985) Report number 1. Photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Arch Ophthalmol 103: 1796–1806Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) (1986) Design and methodological considerations for the feasibility phase. Diabetes 35: 530–545Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klein BEK, Davis MD, Segal P et al (1984) Diabetic retinopathy. Assessment of severity and progression. Ophthalmology 91: 10–17Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) manual of operations (1979) ETDRS coordinating center, University of Maryland, Department of Epidemiology and Preventative Medicine, Division of Clinical Investigation, 600 Wyndhurst Ave, Baltimore, Maryland 21210Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altman DG (1991) Some common problems in medical research. Inter-rater agreement. Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman, London, pp 403–409Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Landis JR, Koch GC (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33: 159–174Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. J. Aldington
    • 1
  • E. M. Kohner
    • 1
  • S. Meuer
    • 2
  • R. Klein
    • 2
  • A. K. SjØlie
    • 3
  • The EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study Group
  1. 1.Diabetic Retinopathy Unit, Department of MedicineRoyal Postgraduate Medical SchoolLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of OphthalmologyUniversity of WisconsinWisconsinUSA
  3. 3.Department of Ophthalmologyårhus University HospitalårhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations