ArticleScientific reports2024
Influence of OCT biomarkers on microperimetry intra- and interdevice repeatability in diabetic macular edema.
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 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.
- Biomarker-Specific Test-Retest Repeatabilities of Microperimetry in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Driven Adjusted OCT-Based Classification System for Diabetic Macular Edema (AIDME).Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the intra- and interdevice repeatability of microperimetry (MP) assessments in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) two consecutive MP testings (45 fovea-centered stimuli, 4-2 staircase strategy) were performed using MP3 (NIDEK, Aichi, Japan) and MAIA (CenterVue, Padova, Italy), respectively. Intraretinal fluid (IRF) and ellipsoid zone (EZ) thickness were automatically segmented by published deep learning algorithms. Hard exudates (HEs) were annotated semi-automatically and disorganization of retinal inner layers (DRIL) was segmented manually. Point-to-point registration of MP stimuli to corresponding spectral-domain OCT (Spectralis, Heidelberg Engineering, Germany) locations was performed for both devices. Repeatability was assessed overall and in areas of disease-specific OCT biomarkers using Bland-Altmann coefficients of repeatability (CoR). A total of 3600 microperimetry stimuli were tested in 20 eyes with DME. Global CoR was high using both devices (MP3: ± 6.55 dB, MAIA: ± 7.69 dB). Higher retest variances were observed in stimuli with IRF (MP3: CoR ± 7.4 dB vs. ± 6.0 dB, p = 0.001, MAIA: CoR ± 9.2dB vs. ± 6.8 dB, p = 0.002) and DRIL on MP3 (CoR ± 6.9 dB vs. ± 3.2 dB, p < 0.001) compared to stimuli without. Repeatabilities were reduced in areas with thinner EZ layers (both p < 0.05). Fixation (Fuji classification) was relatively unstable independent of device and run. These findings emphasize taking higher caution using MP in patients with DME.
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.