Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26966557›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2016

Comparison of Two Different OCT Systems: Retina Layer Segmentation and Impact on Structure-Function Analysis in Glaucoma.

Livia M Brandao, Anna A Ledolter, Andreas Schötzau, Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Livia M BrandaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Anna A LedolterDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Andreas SchötzauDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Anja M Palmowski-WolfeDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose. To compare two different spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) systems in regard to full macular thickness (MT) and ganglion cell layer-inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) measures and in regard to structure-function correlation when compared to standard automated perimetry (SAP). Methods. Seventeen primary open angle glaucoma patients and 16 controls (one eye per subject) were enrolled. MT and GCIPL thicknesses were measured by Cirrus and Spectralis OCTs. Octopus Perimeter 101 (G2 protocol) reports sensitivity in mean defect (dB). Differences between measurements were assessed with Student's t-test and Bland Altman. Diagnostic performance was also compared between each parameter calculating the areas under the operator receiver (ROC). Linear models were used to investigate structure-function association between OCT and SAP. Results. Disagreement between OCTs in both MT and GCIPL values was significant. Spectralis values were thicker than Cirrus. Average difference between OCTs was 21.64 μm (SD 4.5) for MT and 9.8 μm (SD 5.4) for GCIPL (p < 0.001). Patients differed significantly from controls in both OCTs, in both measurements. MT and GCIPL were negatively associated with MD (p < 0.001). Conclusions. Although OCT values were not interchangeable, both machines differentiated patients from controls with statistical significance. Structure-function analysis results were comparable, when either OCT was compared to SAP.

Identifiers

PMID26966557
PMCPMC4757732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.