ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2023
Normative Percentiles of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness and Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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.
- Deep Learning Prediction of Personalized Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Norms from Fundus Images in Glaucoma.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Deep Learning Approach Predicts Longitudinal Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Changes.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Reporting Quality of Glaucoma Randomized Controlled Trial Abstracts: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Big data in visual field testing for glaucoma.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) measurement aids in the clinical diagnosis of glaucoma. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) machines measure RNFLT and provide normative color-coded plots. In this retrospective study, we investigate whether normative percentiles of RNFLT (pRNFLT) from Spectralis SD-OCT improve prediction of glaucomatous visual field loss over raw RNFLT. Methods: A longitudinal database containing OCT scans and visual fields from Massachusetts Eye & Ear glaucoma clinic patients was generated. Reliable OCT-visual field pairs were selected. Spectralis OCT normative distributions were extracted from machine printouts. Supervised machine learning models compared predictive performance between pRNFLT and raw RNFLT inputs. Regional structure-function associations were assessed with univariate regression to predict mean deviation (MD). Multivariable classification predicted MD, pattern standard deviation, MD change per year, and glaucoma hemifield test. Results: There were 3016 OCT-visual field pairs that met the reliability criteria. Spectralis norms were found to be independent of age, sex, and ocular magnification. Regional analysis showed significant decrease in R2 from pRNFLT models compared to raw RNFLT models in inferotemporal sectors, across multiple regressors. In multivariable classification, there were no significant improvements in area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) score with pRNFLT models compared to raw RNFLT models. Conclusions: Our results challenge the assumption that normative percentiles from OCT machines improve prediction of glaucomatous visual field loss. Raw RNFLT alone shows strong prediction, with no models presenting improvement by the manufacturer norms. This may result from insufficient patient stratification in tested norms. Translational Relevance: Understanding correlation of normative databases to visual function may improve clinical interpretation of OCT data.
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.