ArticleOphthalmology. Glaucoma
Comparing the Rule of 5 to Trend-based Analysis for Detecting Glaucoma Progression on OCT.
Article in Ophthalmology. Glaucoma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Deep learning and optical coherence tomography in glaucoma: Bridging the diagnostic gap on structural imaging.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2022Pooled it
- Dynamic Oculomics for Diagnostic Monitoring: Personal Ocular Trends, Risk Stratification and Treatment Response.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Target-label-free artificial intelligence framework for cross-anatomical RNFL biomarker segmentation in optical coherence tomography.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Quantitative Analysis of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Using SPECTRALIS Glaucoma Module Premium Edition and SPECTRALIS Standard Glaucoma Module.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- A SPATIALLY VARYING HIERARCHICAL RANDOM EFFECTS MODEL FOR LONGITUDINAL MACULAR STRUCTURAL DATA IN GLAUCOMA PATIENTS.The annals of applied statistics · 2024Article
- Clinical risk stratification in glaucoma.Eye (London, England) · 2023Review
- Prediction of visual field defects from macular optical coherence tomography in glaucoma using cluster analysis.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe rule of 5 is a simple rule for detecting retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) change on spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT), in which a loss of 5 μm of global RNFL on a follow-up test is considered evidence of significant change when compared with the baseline. The rule is based on short-term test-retest variability of SD-OCT and is often used in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to compare the rule of 5 with trend-based analysis of global RNFL thickness over time for detecting glaucomatous progression.
designProspective cohort.
participantsA total of 300 eyes of 210 glaucoma subjects followed for an average of 5.4±1.5 years with a median of 11 (interquartile range, 7-14) visits.
methodsTrend-based analysis was performed by ordinary least-squares (OLS) linear regression of global RNFL thickness over time. For estimation of specificity, false-positives were obtained by assessing for progression on series of randomly permutated follow-up visits for each eye, which removes any systematic trend over time. The specificity of trend-based analysis was matched to that of the rule of 5 to allow meaningful comparison of the "hit rate," or the proportion of glaucoma eyes categorized as progressing at each time point, using the original sequence of visits.
main outcome measuresComparison between hit rates of trend-analysis versus rule of 5 at matched specificity.
resultsAfter 5 years, the simple rule of 5 identified 37.5% of eyes as progressing at a specificity of 81.1%. At the same specificity, the hit rate for trend-based analysis was significantly greater than that of the rule of 5 (62.9% vs. 37.5%; P < 0.001). If the rule of 5 was required to be repeatable on a consecutive test, specificity improved to 93.4%, but hit rate decreased to 21.0%. At this higher specificity, trend-based analysis still had a significantly greater hit rate than the rule of 5 (47.4% vs. 21.0%, respectively; P < 0.001).
conclusionsTrend-based analysis was superior to the simple rule of 5 for identifying progression in glaucoma eyes and should be preferred as a method for longitudinal assessment of global SD-OCT RNFL change over time.
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.