Observational studyScientific reports2024
Diagnostic performance of wide-field optical coherence tomography angiography for high myopic glaucoma.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Performance of Artificial Intelligence Corrected OCT Measurements in Highly Myopic Eyes with Glaucoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of OCT Angiography Parameters as Biomarkers for Glaucoma Progression.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Diagnostic challenges in high myopia: identification of sight-threatening complications and the role of artificial intelligence.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Diagnosis of Glaucoma Based on Few-Shot Learning with Wide-Field Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Applications of optical coherence tomography angiography in glaucoma: current status and future directions.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Managing Myopic Glaucoma-Beyond Structural Fragility and Diagnostic Challenges: Review Article.Journal of current glaucoma practiceReview
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Diagnosing and monitoring glaucoma in high myopic (HM) eyes are becoming very important; however, it is challenging to diagnose this condition. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic ability of wide-field optical coherence tomography angiography (WF-OCTA) maps for the detection of glaucomatous damage in eyes with HM and to compare the diagnostic ability of WF-OCTA maps with that of conventional imaging approaches, including swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) wide-field maps. In this retrospective observational study, a total 62 HM-healthy eyes and 140 HM eyes with open-angle glaucoma were included. Patients underwent a comprehensive ocular examination, including SS-OCT wide-field and 12 × 12 WF-OCTA scans. The WF-OCTA map represents the peripapillary and macular superficial vascular density maps. Glaucoma specialists determined the presence of glaucomatous damage in HM eyes by reading the WF-OCTA map and comparing its sensitivity and specificity with those of conventional SS-OCT images. The sensitivity and specificity of 12 × 12 WF-OCTA scans for HM-glaucoma diagnosis were 87.28% and 86.94%, respectively, while, the sensitivity and specificity of SS-OCT wide-field maps for HM-glaucoma diagnosis were 87.49% and 80.51%, respectively. The specificity of the WF-OCTA map was significantly higher than that of the SS-OCT wide-field map (p < 0.05). The sensitivity of the WF-OCTA map was comparable with that of the SS-OCT wide-field map (p = 0.078). The WF-OCTA map showed good diagnostic ability for discriminating HM-glaucomatous eyes from HM-healthy eyes. As a complementary method to an alternative imaging modality, WF-OCTA mapping can be a useful tool for the detection of HM glaucoma.
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.