Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29300765›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2018

Optical coherence tomography for glaucoma diagnosis: An evidence based meta-analysis.

Vinay Kansal, James J Armstrong, Robert Pintwala, Cindy Hutnik

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Vinay KansalUniversity of Saskatchewan, Department of Ophthalmology, Saskatoon, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1068-9916
James J ArmstrongWestern University Canada, Faculty of Medicine, London, Canada.
Robert PintwalaWestern University Canada, Faculty of Medicine, London, Canada.
Cindy HutnikWestern University Canada, Department of Ophthalmology, London, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEarly detection, monitoring and understanding of changes in the retina are central to the diagnosis of glaucomatous optic neuropathy, and vital to reduce visual loss from this progressive condition. The main objective of this investigation was to compare glaucoma diagnostic accuracy of commercially available optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices (Zeiss Stratus, Zeiss Cirrus, Heidelberg Spectralis and Optovue RTVue, and Topcon 3D-OCT). PATIENTS: 16,104 glaucomatous and 11,543 normal eyes reported in 150 studies.

methodsBetween Jan. 2017 and Feb 2017, MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, CINAHL®, Cochrane Library®, Web of Science®, and BIOSIS® were searched for studies assessing glaucoma diagnostic accuracy of the aforementioned OCT devices. Meta-analysis was performed pooling area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) estimates for all devices, stratified by OCT type (RNFL, macula), and area imaged.

results150 studies with 16,104 glaucomatous and 11,543 normal control eyes were included. Key findings: AUROC of glaucoma diagnosis for RNFL average for all glaucoma patients was 0.897 (0.887-0.906, n = 16,782 patient eyes), for macula ganglion cell complex (GCC) was 0.885 (0.869-0.901, n = 4841 eyes), for macula ganglion cell inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) was 0.858 (0.835-0.880, n = 4211 eyes), and for total macular thickness was 0.795 (0.754-0.834, n = 1063 eyes).

conclusionThe classification capability was similar across all 5 OCT devices. More diagnostically favorable AUROCs were demonstrated in patients with increased glaucoma severity. Diagnostic accuracy of RNFL and segmented macular regions (GCIPL, GCC) scans were similar and higher than total macular thickness. This study provides a synthesis of contemporary evidence with features of robust inclusion criteria and large sample size. These findings may provide guidance to clinicians when navigating this rapidly evolving diagnostic area characterized by numerous options.

Indexed as

FemaleGlaucomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID29300765
PMCPMC5754143

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.