ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2023
Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.
Article in Turkish journal of ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Assessment: Focus on Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Association between Subretinal Drusenoid Deposits and Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Multimodal Retinal Imaging.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the presence and prevalence of reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using multiple imaging modalities and to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these modalities in the detection of RPD. Materials and Methods: Images from a total of 198 consecutive patients were analyzed prospectively. Color fundus photography, red-free imaging, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), infrared and blue reflectance (BR) imaging, fundus autofluorescence (FAF), enhanced-depth imaging OCT (EDI-OCT), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and indocyanine green angiography were performed. RPD was diagnosed in the presence of relevant findings in at least two of the imaging methods used. Results: RPD were detected in 149 eyes (37.6%). In the detection of RPD, color fundus photography, red-free photography, SD-OCT, infrared, FAF, BR, and FFA imaging had sensitivity values of 50%, 57.7%, 91.6%, 95%, 74.6%, 65.7%, and 28.2% and specificity values of 99.6%, 100%, 98.4%, 94.6%, 100%, 99.6%, and 69.8%, respectively. Conclusion: Infrared imaging had the highest sensitivity. SD-OCT combined with infrared imaging was the most sensitive imaging technique for detecting RPD. The high specificity of FAF, red-free, and BR imaging may be useful to confirm a diagnosis of RPD.
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.