Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29561503›Full record

ArticleOptometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry2018

Polarization Variability in Age-related Macular Degeneration.

Dean A VanNasdale, Ann E Elsner, Victor E Malinovsky, Todd D Peabody, Kimberly D Kohne, Bryan P Haggerty, Christopher A Clark

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cones in ageing and harsh environments: the neural economy hypothesis.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2020
    Review
  6. Near-infrared polarimetric imaging and changes associated with normative aging.Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision · 2018
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dean A VanNasdale
Ann E ElsnerIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Victor E MalinovskyIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Todd D PeabodyIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Kimberly D KohneIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Bryan P HaggertyIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Christopher A ClarkIndiana University School of Optometry, Bloomington, Indiana*vannasdale.1@osu.edu.
Indiana University Bloomington · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

SPATIAL EXTENT OF RETINAL DAMAGER01EY007624 · NEI · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI ELSNER, ANN E · 1995 to 2012
$4.4M
Low-Cost Device for Digital Retinal ImagingR01EB002346 · NIBIB · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI ELSNER, ANN E · 2003 to 2010
$3.1M
Core Support for Vision Research at Indiana UniversityP30EY019008 · NEI · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI BURNS, STEPHEN A · 2009 to 2013
$2.1M
Early Retinal Disease Detection Using Standard And Novel Retinal Imaging TechniquK23EY017886 · NEI · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI VANNASDALE, DEAN ALLAN · 2007 to 2011
$715k
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY017886NEI NIH HHS P30 EY019008NEI NIH HHS R01 EY007624NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB002346
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of irreversible vision loss. Complementary imaging techniques can be used to better characterize and quantify pathological changes associated with AMD. By assessing specific light-tissue interactions, polarization-sensitive imaging can be used to detect tissue disruption early in the disease process. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare variability in central macular polarization properties in patients with nonexudative AMD and age-matched control subjects.

methodsA scanning laser polarimeter (GDx, LDT/CZM) was used to acquire 15 × 15-degree macular images in 10 subjects diagnosed with nonexudative AMD and 10 age-matched control subjects. The coefficient of variation (COV, SD/mean) was used to quantify variability in pixel intensity in the central 3.3° of the macula for custom images emphasizing multiply scattered light (the depolarized light image) and polarization-retaining light (the maximum of the parallel detector image). The intensity COV was compared across subject categories using paired t tests for each image type.

resultsThe COV in the central macula was significantly higher in the AMD subject group (average, 0.221; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.157 to 0.265) when compared with matched control subjects (average 0.120; 95% CI, 0.107 to 0.133) in the depolarized light image (P = .01). The COV in the maximum of the parallel detector image was not statistically different between the two subject groups (AMD average, 0.162 [95% CI, 0.138 to 0.185]; control average, 0.137 [95% CI, 0.115 to 0.158]; P = .21).

conclusionsVariability in multiply scattered light is higher than that of light that is more polarization preserving in patients with nonexudative AMD. Multiple scattering may act as an early indicator representing disruption to the macula in early AMD.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeographic AtrophyHumansLightMacula LuteaMaleMiddle AgedRetinal Pigment EpitheliumScanning Laser PolarimetryScattering, Radiation

Identifiers

PMID29561503
PMCPMC6688506
OpenAlexW2793102644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.