ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2010
Intersubject variability of foveal cone photoreceptor density in relation to eye length.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
119 citing papers in PubMed, 193 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cone dystrophy in patient with homozygous RP1L1 mutation.BioMed research international · 2015Trial
- Correlation of outer nuclear layer thickness with cone density values in patients with retinitis pigmentosa and healthy subjects.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2014Trial
- Photopic pupil size, foveal anatomy and emmetropisation: a cross-sectional study in adult eyes.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Biphasic Change in Retinal Arterial Hemodynamics Amidst Systematic Perfusion Decline With Increasing Degree of Myopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Retinal structure and function recovery over five years in Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease using adaptive optics and microperimetry.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Photoreceptor cone loss is associated with decreased deep retinal vessel density and impaired retinal sensitivity in high myopia.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Asymmetries in Foveal Vision.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Neural contrast sensitivity is not affected by myopic blur.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- In Vivo Cone Photoreceptor Topography of the Human Foveola.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Interocular distribution differences of parafoveal cone photoreceptors between dominant and non-dominant eyes assessed using an adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscope.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- High Resolution Imaging and Fixation Analysis of Eccentric Preferred Retinal Loci in Macular Diseases.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Features of intermediate and late dry age-related macular degeneration on adaptive optics ophthalmoscopy: Pinnacle Study Report 8.Eye (London, England) · 2025Observational
- Asymmetries in foveal vision.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- In vivo assessment of cone loss and macular perfusion in children with myopia.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Morphology of the normative human cone photoreceptor mosaic and a publicly available adaptive optics montage repository.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Modeling Human Macular Cone Photoreceptor Spatial Distribution.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Intervisit Reproducibility of Foveal Cone Density Metrics.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of objective and subjective binocular ocular refraction with looking in type.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparison between Two Adaptive Optics Methods for Imaging of Individual Retinal Pigmented Epithelial Cells.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAdaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO) under optimized wavefront correction allows for routine imaging of foveal cone photoreceptors. The intersubject variability of foveal cone density was measured and its relation to eye length evaluated.
methodsAOSLO was used to image 18 healthy eyes with axial lengths from 22.86 to 28.31 mm. Ocular biometry and an eye model were used to estimate the retinal magnification factor. Individual cones in the AOSLO images were labeled, and the locations were used to generate topographic maps representing the spatial distribution of density. Representative retinal (cones/mm(2)) and angular (cones/deg(2)) cone densities at specific eccentricities were calculated from these maps.
resultsThe entire foveal cone mosaic was resolved in four eyes, whereas the cones within 0.03 mm eccentricity remained unresolved in most eyes. The preferred retinal locus deviated significantly (P < 0.001) from the point of peak cone density for all except one individual. A significant decrease in retinal density (P < 0.05) with increasing axial length was observed at 0.30 mm eccentricity but not closer. Longer, more myopic eyes generally had higher angular density near the foveal center than the shorter eyes, but by 1°, this difference was nullified by retinal expansion, and so angular densities across all eyes were similar.
conclusionsThe AOSLO can resolve the smallest foveal cones in certain eyes. Although myopia causes retinal stretching in the fovea, its effect within the foveola is confounded by factors other than cone density that have high levels of intersubject variability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.