ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2018
Qualitative comparison of choroidal vascularity measurement algorithms.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of shorter silicone oil tamponade time on visual function recovery and associated factors in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Trial
- Choroidal vascular changes in silicone oil-filled eyes after vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachments.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Influence of protocol scan on choroidal vascularity measurements: a spectralis optical coherence tomography study.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Acquisition of optical coherence tomography angiography metrics during hemodialysis procedures: A pilot study.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Choroidal Vascularity Features in Patients with Choroideremia and Cystoid Spaces.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Commentary: Qualitative comparison of choroidal vascularity measurement algorithms.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Reply to Letter to Editor: Water-Drinking Test in Central Serous Chorioretinopathy.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the accuracy of manual and automated binarization technique for the analysis of choroidal vasculature.
methodsThis retrospective study was performed on a total of 98 eyes of 60 healthy subjects. Fovea-centered swept source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) scans were obtained and choroidal area was binarized using manual and automated image binarization technique separately. Choroidal vessel visualization in the binarized scans were subjectively graded (grades 0-100) by comparing them with the original OCT scan images by two masked graders. The subjective variability and repeatability was compared between two binarization method groups. Intergrader and intragrader variability was estimated using paired t-test. The degree of agreement between the grades for each observer and between the observers was evaluated using Bland-Altman plot.
resultsThe mean accuracy grades of the automatically binarized images were significantly (P < 0.001) higher (93.38% ± 1.70%) than that of manually binarized images (78.06% ± 2.92%). There was a statistically significant variability and poor agreement between the mean interobserver grades in the manual binarization arm.
conclusionAutomated image binarization technique is faster and appears to be more accurate in comparison to the manual method.
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.