ArticlePloS one2023
Relationship between ultra-widefield optical coherence tomography and ophthalmoscopy for detecting posterior inflammation in posterior uveitis and panuveitis.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Imaging: new techniques for imaging of the vitreous body].Die Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- The expanding horizon: Role of widefield imaging in uveitis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Progresses in Wound Healing: Integrating Nutrition, Physical Therapy, Traditional and Alternative Medicine, and Novel Technologies.Current diabetes reviews · 2026Review
- Article
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
purposeTo confirm the utility of ultra-widefield optical coherence tomography (W-OCT) for diagnosing uveitis.
methodWe retrospectively studied patients who had been diagnosed with uveitis and had undergone W-OCT. All patients had visited at Osaka Metropolitan University between January 2019 and January 2022. On W-OCT, vitreous opacity ("W-OCT VO") and the presence of vitreous cells ("W-OCT Cells") were identified by three specialists. We compared findings from ophthalmoscopy ("Ophthalmoscopic findings") and fluorescein angiography ("FAG findings") with those from W-OCT.
resultsThis study investigated 132 eyes from 68 patients (34 males, 34 females; mean age, 53.97±22.71 years). Vitreous cells in posterior uveitis and panuveitis differed significantly between "W-OCT Cells" and "Ophthalmoscopic findings" for all cases (P = 0.00014). Vitreous opacities in posterior uveitis and panuveitis did not differ significantly between "W-OCT VO" and "Ophthalmoscopic findings" (P = 0.144) for all cases. Compared to "Ophthalmoscopic findings", "W-OCT Cells" offered 51.1% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity for all cases (p<0.01). Compared to "Ophthalmoscopic findings", "W-OCT VO" offered 78.6% sensitivity and 30% specificity for all cases (p = 0.19). In addition, "W-OCT Cells" did not differ significantly from "FAG findings" for all cases (P = 0.424).
conclusionW-OCT was shown to offer significantly greater sensitivity than ophthalmoscopy for detecting vitreous cells. The results of this study may add an option for the evaluation of uveitis.
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.