ArticleInternational ophthalmology2016
Comparability of retinal thickness measurements using different scanning protocols on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement for three optical coherence tomography instruments.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Tracing the retina to analyze the integrity and phagocytic capacity of the retinal pigment epithelium.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retinal thickness measurements obtained using optical coherence tomography (OCT) play an essential role both in multi-center clinical trials and in normal clinical practice. Different scanning protocols are available on most OCT devices, and it is important to ascertain whether the retinal thickness measurements obtained from these are comparable. This study aimed to compare retinal thickness measurements between raster and radial scanning protocols using spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT). In a prospective study, 32 healthy subjects were scanned sequentially using raster and radial protocols from a SD-OCT device. For both the raster and radial OCT scans, retinal thicknesses were measured manually subfoveally and at 12 other points at 0.5 mm intervals temporally and nasally on the horizontal OCT B-scan passing through the fovea. The retinal thickness measurements were compared using intraclass correlation (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. Subfoveal retinal thickness was 227.0 µm when measured on the raster scan and 229.2 µm on the radial scan, with a mean difference of 2.2 µm (P = 0.141).The ICC for agreement was 0.889 (95 % confidence interval 0.818-0.933). Similar results were observed for retinal thickness measurements at all other points, with mean differences ranging from -3.37 to 2.59 µm, and ICC values ranging from 0.837 to 0.972. The retinal thickness measurements obtained by the raster and radial scans of the same SD-OCT device are comparable, with differences of less than 4 µm. This is of relevance when measurements made using different OCT scan protocols are compared.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26887565What 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.