ArticlePloS one2020
Estimation of the central 10-degree visual field using en-face images obtained by optical coherence tomography.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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.
- Interplay Between γ-Zone Peripapillary Atrophy and Optic Disc Parameters in Central Visual Field Impairment in Highly Myopic Eyes.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Damage Assessment in Glaucomatous Eyes Using Retinal Retardance Measured by Polarization-Sensitive Optical Coherence Tomography.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Enhanced Objective Detection of Retinal Nerve Fiber Bundle Defects in Glaucoma With a Novel Method for En Face OCT Slab Image Construction and Analysis.Translational vision science & technology · 2021Article
- A Simple Subjective Evaluation of Enface OCT Reflectance Images Distinguishes Glaucoma From Healthy Eyes.Translational vision science & technology · 2021Article
- Optical coherence tomography angiography and Humphrey field analyser for macular capillary non-perfusion evaluation in branch retinal vein occlusion.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo estimate the central 10-degree visual field of glaucoma patients using en-face images obtained by optical coherence tomography (OCT), and to examine its usefulness. PATIENTS AND
methodsThirty-eight eyes of 38 patients with primary open angle glaucoma were examined. En-face images were obtained by swept-source OCT (SS-OCT). Nerve fiber bundles (NFBs) on en-face images at points corresponding to Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 10-2 locations were identified with retinal ganglion cell displacement. Estimated visual fields were created based on the presence/absence of NFBs and compared to actual HFA10-2 data. κ coefficients were calculated between probability plots of visual fields and NFBs in en-face images.
resultsActual HFA10-2 data and estimated visual fields based on en-face images were well matched: when the test points of <5%, <2%, and <1% of the probability plot in total deviation (TD) and pattern deviation (PD) of HFA were defined as points with visual field defects, the κ coefficients were 0.58, 0.64, and 0.66 in TD, respectively, and 0.68, 0.69, and 0.67 in PD. In eyes with spherical equivalent ≥ -6 diopters, κ coefficients for <5%, <2%, and <1% were 0.58, 0.62, and 0.63 in TD and 0.66, 0.67, and 0.65 in PD, whereas for the myopic group with spherical equivalent < -6 diopters, the values were 0.58, 0.69, and 0.71 in TD and 0.72, 0.71, and 0.71 in PD, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in κ coefficients between highly myopic eyes and eyes that were not highly myopic.
conclusionsNFB defects in en-face images were correlated with HFA10-2 data. Using en-face images obtained by OCT, the central 10-degree visual field was estimated, and a high degree of concordance with actual HFA10-2 data was obtained. This method may be useful for detecting functional abnormalities based on structural abnormalities.
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.