ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Analysis of OCT Scanning Parameters in AMD and RVO.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macular thickness and vascular density assessment using optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomography angiography imaging in iron ore mine personnel.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- WaveAttention-ResNet: a deep learning-based intelligent diagnostic model for the auxiliary diagnosis of multiple retinal diseases.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an extensively used imaging tool for disease monitoring in both age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO). However, there is limited literature on minimum requirements of OCT settings for reliable biomarker detection. This study systematically investigates both the influence of scan size and interscan distance (ISD) on disease activity detection. We analyzed 80 OCT volumes of AMD patients and 12 OCT volumes of RVO patients for the presence of subretinal fluid (SRF), intraretinal fluid (IRF), and pigment epithelium detachment (PED). All volume scans had a scan size of 6 × 6 mm and an ISD of 125 µm. We analyzed both general fluid distribution and how biomarker detection sensitivity decreases when reducing scan size or density. We found that in AMD patients, all fluids were nearly normally distributed, with most occurrences in the foveal center and concentric decrease towards the periphery. When reducing the scan size to 3 × 3 and 2 × 2 mm, disease activity detection was still high (0.98 and 0.96). Increasing ISD only slightly can already compromise biomarker detection sensitivity (0.9 for 250 µm ISD against 125 µm ISD).
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.