ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2020
Comparison of SDOCT Scan Types for Grading Disorganization of Retinal Inner Layers and Other Morphologic Features of Diabetic Macular Edema.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macular vascular and photoreceptor changes for diabetic macular edema at early stage.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Indicators of Visual Prognosis in Diabetic Macular Oedema.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- A New Approach to Staging Diabetic Eye Disease: Staging of Diabetic Retinal Neurodegeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema.Ophthalmology scienceReview
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 at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To assess grading reproducibility of disorganization of the retinal inner layers (DRIL) and other morphologic features of diabetic macular edema (DME) across spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) instruments and scan types. Methods: A cross-sectional study enrolled participants with current or recent center-involved DME. In group A (27 eyes), we obtained two Cirrus scans (512 × 128 macular cube [Cube] and high-definition five-line raster [HD 5-Line]) and two Spectralis scans (high-resolution [HR] and high-speed [HS]). In group B, 26 eyes underwent HR scans and Optovue AngioVue (OP) 3 × 3-mm scans. All scans were graded for type and extent of DRIL, intraretinal cysts, cone outer segment tip visibility, and subretinal fluid (SRF). Results: In the total cohort, mean central subfield thickness was 342.9 ± 83.4 µm. Intraclass correlations were high for DRIL extent across the four different imaging settings (HR vs. HS, Conclusions: Our data suggest that the reproducibility for SDOCT parameters of DRIL and intraretinal cysts was high across all five SDOCT scan types; thus, evaluation of DRIL is feasible using multiple SDOCT models in eyes with DME. Translational Relevance: DME morphological changes can be evaluated on multiple SDOCT devices with good reproducibility, allowing clinicians and researchers flexibility in DME assessment for clinical care and research.
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.