Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31179391›Full record

ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2019

Repeatability of choroidal thickness measurements with Spectralis OCT images.

Jason K Lau, Sin Wan Cheung, Michael J Collins, Pauline Cho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. IMI-Instrumentation for Myopia Management.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Jason K LauSchool of Optometry, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-0829-6494
Sin Wan CheungSchool of Optometry, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.
Michael J CollinsSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Pauline ChoSchool of Optometry, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the repeatability of choroidal thickness measurements determined from enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT) images of eyes after wearing single-vision spectacles (SV) and orthokeratology (ortho-k) lenses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two EDI-OCT images of 40 children (SV: 20, ortho-k: 20) taken at a single visit were analysed twice. Subjects in the ortho-k group had been wearing ortho-k for 1-4 weeks. The choroidal thickness was determined from each image using a graph theory-based software and, where appropriate, manual correction of choroidal boundaries was undertaken by an experienced examiner.

resultsThe mean (±SD) choroidal thickness was 227.3±42.2 µm for the SV subjects and 251.1±54.4 µm for the ortho-k subjects. The interimage differences in choroidal thickness were -0.99±3.54 and -1.14±5.03 µm for the SV and ortho-k subjects, respectively, and the limits of agreement were +5.96 to -7.93 and +8.72 to -11.00 µm, respectively.

conclusionThe coefficients of repeatability of choroidal thickness measurements from two EDI-OCT images taken at a single visit were 7.08 µm (SV) and 10.06 µm (ortho-k), suggesting that a change in choroidal thickness of less than 10 µm may not indicate a real change resulting from ortho-k lens wear.

Indexed as

choroidal thicknessorthokeratologyrepeatabilitysemi-automated segmentation

Identifiers

PMID31179391
PMCPMC6528750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.