ArticleBioMed research international2015
Structural and Function Correlation of Cone Packing Utilizing Adaptive Optics and Microperimetry.
Article in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship Between Visual Sensitivity and Eccentricity, Cone Density and Outer Segment Length in the Human Foveola.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021Article
- Retinal Differential Light Sensitivity Variation Across the Macula in Healthy Subjects: Importance of Cone Separation and Loci Eccentricity.Translational vision science & technology · 2021Article
- Comparing Cone Structure and Function in RHO- and RPGR-Associated Retinitis Pigmentosa.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020Article
- Adaptive optics imaging of the human retina.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2019Review
- Distribution of cone density, spacing and arrangement in adult healthy retinas with adaptive optics flood illumination.PloS one · 2018Article
- Agreement in Cone Density Derived from Gaze-Directed Single Images Versus Wide-Field Montage Using Adaptive Optics Flood Illumination Ophthalmoscopy.Translational vision science & technology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the functional aspects of cone mosaic and correlate cone packing with retinal sensitivity utilizing microperimetry in emmetropes at different eccentricities.
methodsTwenty-four healthy volunteers underwent microperimetry (MAIA Centervue, Italy) and assessment of photoreceptors using adaptive optics retinal camera, rtx1 (Imagine Eyes, Orsay, France), at 2 and 3 degrees from the foveal centre in 4 quadrants: superior, inferior, temporal, and nasal. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 17 (IBM). Spearman's correlation tests were used to establish correlation between mean cone packing density and retinal sensitivity at different quadrants.
resultsThirteen females and 11 males (age range 20-40 years) were included. The cone density was found to be significantly different among all quadrants (temporal = 25786.68/mm(2) ± 4367.07/mm(2), superior = 23009.35/mm(2) ± 5415.81/mm(2), nasal = 22838.09/mm(2) ± 4166.22/mm(2), and inferior = 21097.53/mm(2) ± 4235.84/mm(2)). A statistical significance (P < 0.008) was found between orthogonal meridians, that is, temporal, nasal (48624.77/mm(2))> superior, inferior (44106.88/mm(2)). A drop in retinal sensitivity was observed as the eccentricity increased (P < 0.05). It was also found that as cone packing density decreased retinal sensitivity also decreased (P < 0.05) in all quadrants. This was observed at both 2 and 3 degrees.
conclusionIt is of crucial importance to establish normative variations in cone structure-function correlation. This may help in detection of subtle pathology and its early intervention.
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.