ArticleScientific reports2024
Inter and intradevice assessment of microperimetry testing in aging eyes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mesopic microperimetry in Stargardt disease: Application and reliability.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Trial
- Repeatability of Foveal Sensitivity Measured Using Adaptive Optics Microperimetry.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Choriocapillaris Flow-Enriched Prediction of Retinal Sensitivity Using OCT-Derived Biomarkers in Intermediate Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Automated OCT-tailored and same-visit biomarker-targeted microperimetry in geographic atrophy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Visual Function Assessment in Geographic Atrophy: A Review.Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Feasibility of Electroencephalography-Based Detection of Single-Flash Microperimetry Stimuli: A Proof-of-Concept Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Biomarker-Specific Test-Retest Repeatabilities of Microperimetry in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Deep-Learning-Based Analysis of Disease-Specific Structural Biomarkers on Retinal Sensitivity in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Normative prospective data on automatically quantified retinal morphology correlated to retinal function in healthy ageing eyes by two microperimetry devices.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- Comparison Between MAIA and MP-3 In Healthy Subjects and Patients With Diabetes, Diabetic Retinopathy, and Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Influence of OCT biomarkers on microperimetry intra- and interdevice repeatability in diabetic macular edema.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Exploiting Microperimetry as a Functional End Point in Healthy Aging and Different Stages of Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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
Microperimetry (MP) is a psychometric examination combining retinal imaging and functional sensitivity testing with an increasing importance due to its potential use as clinical study outcome. We investigated the repeatability of pointwise retinal sensitivity (PWS) on the most advanced commercially available MP devices under their standard setting in a healthy aging population. Two successive MP examinations on both MP-3 (NIDEK CO., Ltd., Gamagori, Japan) and MAIA (CenterVue S.p.A. (iCare), Padova, Italy) were performed on healthy aging subjects in a randomized order. PWS repeatability was analysed for different macular regions and age groups using Bland-Altmann coefficients of repeatability (CoR). A total of 3600 stimuli from 20 healthy individuals with a mean age of 70 (11) years were included. Mean CoR in dB were ±4.61 for MAIA and ±4.55 for MP-3 examinations. A lower repeatability (p=0.005) was detected in the central millimetre on MAIA examinations. Higher subject age was associated with a lower repeatability of PWS on both devices (both p=0.003). Intra-device correlation was good (MAIA: 0.79 [0.76-0.81]; MP-3: 0.72 [0.68-0.76]) whereas a moderate mean inter-device correlation (0.6 [0.55-0.65]) could be detected. In conclusion, older subjects and the foveal region are associated with a worse pointwise repeatability.
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.