ArticleResearch square2023
Agreement and Precision of Wide and Cube Scan Measurements between Swept-source and Spectral-domain OCT in Normal and Glaucoma Eyes.
Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate agreement of Wide scan measurements from swept-source optical coherence tomography(SS-OCT) Triton and spectral-domain OCT(SD-OCT) Maestro in normal/glaucoma eyes, and to assess the precision of measurements from Wide and Cube scans of both devices. Three Triton and three Maestro operator/device configurations were created by pairing three operators, with study eye and testing order randomized. Three scans were captured for Wide (12mm×9mm), Macular Cube (7mmx7mm-Triton; 6mmx6mm-Maestro), and Optic Disc Cube (6mmx6mm) scans for 25 normal eyes and 25 glaucoma eyes. Thickness of circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer(cpRNFL), ganglion cell layer+inner plexiform layer(GCL+), and ganglion cell complex(GCL++) was obtained from each scan. A two-way random effect analysis of variance model was used to estimate the repeatability and reproducibility; agreement was evaluated by Bland-Altman analysis and Deming regression. Precision limit estimates were low: <5µm for macular and <10µm for optic disc parameters. Precision for Wide and Cube scans of both devices were comparablein both groups. Excellent agreement between the two devices was found for Wide scans, with the mean difference<3µm across all measurements (cpRNFL<3µm, GCL+<2µm, GCL++<1µm), indicating interoperability. A single Wide scan covering the peripapillary and macular regions may be useful for glaucoma management.
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.