ArticlePloS one2024
The utility of orbital imaging in the evaluation of orbital disease.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Equity and Generalizability of Radiomics in Orbital Disease: Challenges for Ophthalmology, Otolaryngology, and Plastic Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Exploring the Etiologies of Acquired Unilateral Proptosis: A Literature Review with Case Presentations.Archives of plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Normal Measurements of Orbital Structures in Healthy Adult Individuals by Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Method.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study investigates the accuracy of either computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the evaluation of various orbital diseases.
methodsWe collected 126 CT scans and 65 MRI scans from 144 subjects and asked two radiologists to interpret the images without clinical information. Images included 14 with a clinical diagnosis of orbital infection, 144 with orbital inflammation, and 33 with orbital neoplasm. The inflammatory diseases included thyroid eye disease (TED, n = 69), non-specific orbital inflammation (NSOI, n = 44), IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD, n = 15), sarcoidosis (Sarcoid, n = 9), granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA, n = 5), and Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD, n = 2).
resultsThe balanced accuracy (BA) for the two radiologists ranged from 0.87 to 0.90 for cellulitis, 0.81 to 0.86 for inflammation, and 0.82 to 0.85 for neoplasm. Radiologists were excellent at recognizing GPA (BA = 0.98 to 0.99) and very good for TED (BA = 0.80 to 0.86). They also did well identifying IgG4-RD (BA = 0.75 to 0.77), but slightly less well for NSOI (BA = 0.69 to 0.75) and poorly for Sarcoid (BA = 0.48 to 0.50).
conclusionsCT or MRI scanning contributes to the evaluation of patients with orbital disease, but accuracy does varies based depending on the diagnosis. We could not evaluate issues such as determination of disease activity, variability based on the unit used for imaging or the skills beyond those of our two specialized neuroradiologists. Future studies should directly compare the two imaging modalities and assess the utility of imaging to determine disease activity.
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.