ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology2019
Longitudinal Macular Structure-Function Relationships in Glaucoma and Their Sources of Variability.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multicenter OCT-Based Visual Field Representations via Segmentation-Free 3D CNNs: Forecasting, Longitudinal Variability, and Progression Detection.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Deep Learning Estimation of 10-2 Visual Field Map Based on Macular Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Measurements.American journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Prediction of Central Visual Field Measures From Macular OCT Volume Scans With Deep Learning.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Association Between Rate of Ganglion Cell Complex Thinning and Rate of Central Visual Field Loss.JAMA ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Ganglion Cell Complex: The Optimal Measure for Detection of Structural Progression in the Macula.American journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Estimating Ganglion Cell Complex Rates of Change With Bayesian Hierarchical Models.Translational vision science & technology · 2021Article
- High-Pass Visual Acuity Loss and Macular Structure-Function Relationship in Patients With Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2021Article
- Detection of Glaucoma Deterioration in the Macular Region with Optical Coherence Tomography: Challenges and Solutions.American journal of ophthalmology · 2021Review
- Longitudinal Macular Structure-Function Relationships in Glaucoma.Ophthalmology · 2020Observational
- Does Retinal Ganglion Cell Loss Precede Visual Field Loss in Glaucoma?Journal of glaucoma · 2019Review
- Longitudinal Structure-Function Relationship between Macular Vessel Density and Thickness and Central Visual Field in Early Glaucoma.Ophthalmology. GlaucomaArticle
- Local Macular Thickness Relationships between 2 OCT Devices.Ophthalmology. GlaucomaArticle
- Macular imaging with optical coherence tomography in glaucoma.Survey of ophthalmologyReview
- Optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomography angiography in glaucoma: diagnosis, progression, and correlation with functional tests.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyReview
- A Joint Bayesian Longitudinal Model for Macular Structure-Function Correlations in Glaucoma.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo review central structure-function (SF) relationships in glaucoma; to compare contributions of within-session and between-session variability to total variability of macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) thickness measurements; and to test the hypothesis that longitudinal within-eye variability of central SF relationships is smaller than between-individual variability.
methodsWe reviewed the pertinent literature on central SF relationships in glaucoma. Thirty-eight eyes (20 normal or glaucoma subjects) had ×3 macular images per session over 3 sessions, and superpixels thickness measurements for ganglion cell layer (GCL), ganglion cell/inner plexiform layer (GCIPL), ganglion cell complex (GCC), and full macular thickness (FMT) were exported. Linear mixed models were used for estimating contributions of between- and within-session variability to total thickness variability. One hundred twenty eyes with ≥3 10° visual fields (VFs)/OCT images were enrolled for the longitudinal study. We investigated within-eye longitudinal SF relationships (GCIPL thickness vs VF total deviations) with a change-point regression model and compared within-eye to between-individual variabilities with components-of-variance models.
resultsIn the cross-sectional study, the between-session component contributed 8%, 11%, 11%, and 36% of total variability for GCL, GCIPL, GCC, and FMT, respectively. In the longitudinal study, between-individual variability explained 78%, 77%, and 67% of total SF variability at 3.4°, 5.6°, and 6.8° eccentricities, respectively (P < .05). SF relationships remained stable over time within individual eyes.
conclusionsWithin-session variability accounts for most of macular thickness variability over time. Longitudinal within-eye SF variability is smaller than between-individual variability. Study of within-eye SF relationships could help clinicians better understand SF linking in glaucoma and help refine progression algorithms. NOTE: Publication of this article is sponsored by the American Ophthalmological Society.
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.