Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31889143›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Age-related changes of individual macular retinal layers among Asians.

Jacqueline Chua, Yih Chung Tham, Bingyao Tan, Kavya Devarajan, Florian Schwarzhans, Alfred Gan, Damon Wong, Carol Y Cheung, Shivani Majithia, Sahil Thakur and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. An Evaluation of the Retinal Nerve Fibre Layer and Ganglion Cell Layer Thickness in Low Myopes.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Intervisit Reproducibility of Foveal Cone Density Metrics.Translational vision science & technology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors.

Jacqueline ChuaSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6474-5293
Yih Chung ThamSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6752-797X
Bingyao TanSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Kavya DevarajanSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Florian SchwarzhansCenter for Medical Statistics Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Section for Medical Information Management and Imaging, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Alfred GanSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Damon WongSERI-NTU Advanced Ocular Engineering (STANCE), Singapore, Singapore.
Carol Y CheungDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Shivani MajithiaSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Sahil ThakurSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Georg FischerCenter for Medical Statistics Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Section for Medical Information Management and Imaging, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Clemens VassDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4756-9088
Ching-Yu ChengSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0655-885X
Leopold SchmettererSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore. leopold.schmetterer@seri.com.sg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We characterized the age-related changes of the intra-retinal layers measured with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT; Cirrus high-definition OCT [Carl Zeiss Meditec]. The Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases is a population-based, cross-sectional study of Chinese, Malays and Indians living in Singapore. Iowa Reference Algorithms (Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging) were used for intra-retinal layer segmentation and mean thickness of 10 intra-retinal layers rescaled with magnification correction using axial length value. Linear regression models were performed to investigate the association of retinal layers with risk factors. After excluding participants with history of diabetes or ocular diseases, high-quality macular SD-OCT images were available for 2,047 participants (44-89 years old). Most of the retinal layers decreased with age except for foveal retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and the inner/outer segments of photoreceptors where they increased with age. Men generally had thicker retinal layers than women. Chinese have the thickest RNFL and retinal pigment epithelium amongst the ethnic groups. Axial length and refractive error remained correlated with retinal layers in spite of magnification correction. Our data show pronounced age-related changes in retinal morphology. Age, gender, ethnicity and axial length need be considered when establishing OCT imaging biomarkers for ocular or systemic disease.

Indexed as

Asian PeopleAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsComorbidityEthnicityFemaleGeriatric AssessmentHumansMacula LuteaMaleMiddle AgedRetinaRetinal DiseasesSingapore

Identifiers

PMID31889143
PMCPMC6937292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.