ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2020
Retinal Vessel Oxygen Saturation Measurement Protocols and Their Agreement.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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.
- Retinal Oxygen Delivery and Extraction in Ophthalmologically Healthy Subjects With Different Blood Pressure Status.Translational vision science & technology · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess agreement between different image sizes and analysis protocols for determination of retinal vessel oxygen saturation in the peripapillary retina of healthy individuals. Methods: Retinal oximetry measurements were acquired from 87 healthy volunteers using the IMEDOS Systems oxygen module. The peripapillary retinal vessels were assessed in a concentric annulus around the optic nerve head. Single and average vessel comparisons were made at different image field sizes of 30° and 50°. Comparisons between images obtained at 30° and 50° were made in a subset of 47 of the 87 individuals. Results: All subjects were normotensive and had normal intraocular pressures (9-16 mm Hg). Analyses of agreement between single vessel, averaged vessel, and between different size images were sought by Bland-Altman analyses, of which all yielded a low bias (<1% oxygen saturation). However, agreement between single vessels of consecutive images showed increased limits of agreement compared with saturation values calculated by averaging all or just the four major arcades of one image. Agreement between 30° and 50° images showed a similar bias as when comparing data obtained with the same camera angle setting but exhibited larger confidence intervals (arteries: bias = 0.21% [9.04/-8.62]%; veins: bias = 0.71% [14.82/-13.40]%). Conclusions: Averaging methods yielded the best agreement; there was little difference in average arterial and venous oxygen saturation between protocols, which analyze all vessels versus the four largest vessels. The least agreement was found for single vessel measurements and comparisons between different camera angles. Translational Relevance: Standardization of image capture protocols (same image size and undertaking a vessel averaging approach for oxygenation analysis) will enhance the detection of smaller physiological changes in eye disease.
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.