Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36066322›Full record

Trial reportTranslational vision science & technology2022

Interobserver Agreement of Electrode to Retina Distance Measurements in a Second-Generation (44-Channel) Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis.

Carla J Abbott, Elizabeth K Baglin, Maria Kolic, Myra B McGuinness, Samuel A Titchener, Kiera A Young, Jonathan Yeoh, Chi D Luu, Lauren N Ayton, Matthew A Petoe and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03406416 (Evaluation of a Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03406416 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of a Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis: A 44 Channel Fully Implantable Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMobius Medical Pty Ltd.Ran2018 to 2020Enrolled4ConditionsRetinitis Pigmentosa, ChoroideremiaArms44Ch Bionic Eye Device
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Carla J AbbottCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Elizabeth K BaglinCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Maria KolicCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Myra B McGuinnessCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Samuel A TitchenerBionics Institute of Australia, Victoria, Australia.
Kiera A YoungCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Jonathan YeohCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Chi D LuuCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Lauren N AytonCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Matthew A PetoeBionics Institute of Australia, Victoria, Australia.
Penelope J AllenCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The electrode to retina (ER) distance is an important contributory factor to the safety and efficacy of a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. Measuring ER distance may be performed by different observers during multisite studies. The aim of this study was to assess the interobserver agreement in measuring ER distance. Methods: Three independent, trained observers measured ER distance from the center of each suprachoroidal electrode to the inner retinal pigment epithelium in spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) B-scans. A total of 121 ER distance measurements from 77 B-scans collected over 5 months from one subject implanted with a second-generation 44-channel suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis (NCT03406416) were made by each observer. Results: ER distance ranged from 208 to 509 µm. Pearson's correlation coefficient (ρ) showed agreement of 0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98-0.99) in measuring ER for each pairwise comparison. The mean difference in ER distance between observers ranged from 2.4 to 6.4 µm with pairwise limits of agreement (95% CI) of ±20 µm (5.5% of mean). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) showed agreement of 0.98 (95% CI = 0.97-0.99) between observers. Conclusions: There is high agreement in measuring ER distances for suprachoroidal retinal prostheses using our systematic approach between multiple, trained observers, supporting the use of a single observer for each image. Translational Relevance: High interobserver agreement outcomes indicate that multiple, trained observers can be used to take ER measurements across different images in suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis studies. This improves multisite study efficiency and gives confidence in interpreting results relating to the safety and efficacy of suprachoroidal retinal prostheses.

Indexed as

Visual ProsthesisElectrodesHumansObserver VariationRetinaTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID36066322
PMCPMC9463715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.