ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2021
MRI-based 3D retinal shape determination.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Motion-corrected Gaussian, mean, and parametric curvature mapping of the posterior eye with pupil-tracked whole-eye OCT.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
- Estimating uveal melanoma volume with ellipsoid tumour models.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- Longitudinal Study of Changes in Retinal Curvature and its Relationship With Myopia Shift in Chinese Children.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Patient-specific mapping of fundus photographs to three-dimensional ocular imaging.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Geometrical accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for ocular proton therapy planning.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Eye Size and Shape in Relation to Refractive Error in Children: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging reveals possible cause of diplopia after Baerveldt glaucoma implantation.PloS one · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo establish a good method to determine the retinal shape from MRI using three-dimensional (3D) ellipsoids as well as evaluate its reproducibility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The left eyes of 31 volunteers were imaged using high-resolution ocular MRI. The 3D MR-images were segmented and ellipsoids were fitted to the resulting contours. The dependency of the resulting ellipsoid parameters on the evaluated fraction of the retinal contour was assessed by fitting ellipsoids to 41 different fractions. Furthermore, the reproducibility of the complete procedure was evaluated in four subjects. Finally, a comparison with conventional two-dimensional (2D) methods was made.
resultsThe mean distance between the fitted ellipsoids and the segmented retinal contour was 0.03±0.01 mm (mean±SD) for the central retina and 0.13±0.03 mm for the peripheral retina. For the central retina, the resulting ellipsoid radii were 12.9±0.9, 13.7±1.5 and 12.2±1.2 mm along the horizontal, vertical and central axes. For the peripheral retina, these radii decreased to 11.9±0.6, 11.6±0.4 and 10.4±0.7 mm, which was accompanied by a mean 1.8 mm posterior shift of the ellipsoid centre. The reproducibility of the ellipsoid fitting was 0.3±1.2 mm for the central retina and 0.0±0.1 mm for the peripheral retina. When 2D methods were used to fit the peripheral retina, the fitted radii differed a mean 0.1±0.1 mm from the 3D method.
conclusionAn accurate and reproducible determination of the 3D retinal shape based on MRI is provided together with 2D alternatives, enabling wider use of this method in the field of ophthalmology.
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.