ArticleScientific reports2024
Variability of thermal subthreshold retinal laser treatment plans.
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 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.
- Feasibility of teleguided training of retinal laser photocoagulation to optimize education of ophthalmology residents.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Teleguided photocoagulation treatments across continents with a remotely programmed laser for retinal diseases.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the variability in subthreshold laser treatment plans for patients with diabetic macular edema or central serous chorioretinopathy. Diagnostic images from 20 patients were utilized, and 25 retina specialists generated subthreshold treatment plans along with a self-rated experience level. Evaluation comprised of i) Area Variability (AV): quantifies the consensus regarding the covered area and is the difference between the areas planned by 75% and 25% of the participants ii) mean Centroid Distance (CD): level of agreement on the localization of a treatment. Subgroup analysis investigated the impact of participants' experience levels, utilizing the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test. The predominant plan style is a targeted treatment approach (92%) and avoidance of subfoveal region (89%). Mean CD is 71.0 ± 37.5 pixels (≈half disc diameter) and mean AV is 9.8%±8.9%. A slight difference is observed between the 50-75% areas, but a notable distinction exists between the 25-50% areas. Subgroup analysis revealed CD and AV value of 75.9 pixels and 24% in the lower experience level group as opposed to 55.9 pixels and 8.6% in the higher experience level group. There is significant variability in treatment planning which reduces with increased experience of retina specialists. While consensus is observed around focal points, differences in the surrounding extents persist.
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.