ArticleYonsei medical journal2018
Diagnostic Ability of Swept-Source and Spectral-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography for Glaucoma.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structure function relationships differ between optic neuritis and glaucoma with comparable optical coherence tomography findings.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparison of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer and Ganglion Cell-Inner Plexiform Layer Thickness Values Using Spectral-Domain and Swept-Source OCT.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Performance evaluation of various deep learning based models for effective glaucoma evaluation using optical coherence tomography images.Multimedia tools and applications · 2022Article
- Effect of systemic blood pressure on optical coherence tomography angiography in glaucoma patients.Eye (London, England) · 2021Article
- Factors associated with macular vessel density measured by optical coherence tomography angiography in healthy and glaucomatous eyes.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 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
purposeTo compare the diagnostic abilities of swept-source optical coherence tomography (OCT) [Deep Range Imaging OCT-1 (DRI-OCT)] and spectral-domain OCT (Cirrus HD-OCT) for glaucoma in Korean adults. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study involved measuring peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (PP-RNFL) thickness, full macular thickness, and ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GC-IPL) thickness on two different OCT systems. We used three-dimensional optic disc scanning of DRI-OCT and included 12 clock-hour sectors for measurement of the PP-RNFL. Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were calculated and compared to determine how well each system could distinguish control and glaucomatous patients.
resultsNinety-one healthy and 58 glaucomatous eyes were included. Both systems could clearly distinguish between control eyes and eyes with moderate to severe glaucoma. Among all sectors, the AUC values of areas associated with glaucoma were >0.7 for both OCTs. The PP-RNFL sector of highest AUC value on both OCTs was the inferior sector of the clock-hour map (0.968 and 0.959 in DRI-OCT and Cirrus HD-OCT, respectively). Among macular thickness sectors, AUC values were highest on both OCTs for the outer inferior sector (0.859 and 0.853 in DRI-OCT and Cirrus HD-OCT, respectively). The GC-IPL also provided high diagnostic values (DRI-OCT and Cirrus HD-OCT were the best in the average and inferior sectors, respectively).
conclusionAlthough the two OCT systems provided different thickness measurements, DRI-OCT exhibited as good, if not better, diagnostic ability for glaucoma as Cirrus HD-OCT in Korean adults.
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.