ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Comparing the Thin Plate Spline and Gaussian Interpolation Methods in Generating Hill of Visions for X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa Patients.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: To compare the efficacy of thin plate spline (TPS) and Gaussian interpolation methods in generating hill of visions (HOVs) for patients with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP). Methods: Visual field data from 78 eyes of 39 patients with XLRP were acquired using the Octopus 900 Pro. TPS, Gaussian, and Universal Kriging interpolation methods were implemented to generate HOVs. The volume of the entire grid (VTot), a 30-degree region (V30), and the volume ratio (VRatio) were calculated. Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman limit of agreement (LOA) analysis were performed to assess the concordance. An undersampled grid was used to assess the accuracy of the interpolation by comparing the interpolated value to the actual measured value. Results: There were strong positive correlations (R > 0.99, P < 0.001), and LOA analysis revealed minimal differences between the three methods. Gaussian interpolation performed the fastest (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: TPS and Gaussian interpolation methods demonstrated a high degree of concordance in generating HOVs for patients with XLRP. The choice of methods depends on the specific needs and priorities of researchers and clinicians, factoring in speed, accessibility, ease of implementation, and the ability to fine-tune the interpolation. Translational Relevance: Accurate HOV analysis is crucial for monitoring and assessing visual field loss progression. TPS and Gaussian interpolation methods are equally effective in generating HOV representations for patients with XLRP. The choice of method can be based on specific needs of researchers or clinicians, enabling more personalized treatment strategies and better disease management.
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.