ArticlePloS one2020
Assessment of primary open-angle glaucoma peripapillary and macular choroidal area using enhanced depth imaging 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between choroidal thickness and primary open angle glaucoma in highly myopic eyes.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe current study investigated differences in the peripapillary and macular choroidal areas between patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and healthy controls because the choroid may potentially play a role in glaucoma pathophysiology.
methodsWe assessed 57 healthy controls and 42 POAG patients in a cross-sectional comparative study. We used enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT) and then converted the luminal and interstitial areas to binary images using the Niblack method to obtain peripapillary and macular choroidal images. The relationship between the choroidal area and demographic and ocular characteristics were determined with univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis.
resultsRegarding the peripapillary choroidal area, no significant differences were noted between healthy controls and POAG patients (1,836,336 ± 605,617 μm2 vs. 1,775,566 ± 477,317 μm2, respectively, P = 0.60). There were also no differences found for the macular choroidal area (controls: 347,220 ± 115,409 μm2, patients: 342,193 ± 104,356 μm2, P = 0.83). Multivariate regression analysis in the POAG patients revealed there was a significant relationship between the macular choroidal area and age (β = -0.525, P = 0.002) and axial length (β = -0.458, P = 0.005). In contrast, no correlation was found between peripapillary choroidal areas and various attributes in the POAG patients.
conclusionsEDI-OCT showed no differences in the peripapillary or macular choroidal area in healthy individuals compared to POAG patients.
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.