ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2024
Cup-to-disc ratio measured clinically and via OCT in pediatric patients being monitored as glaucoma suspects for suspicious optic discs.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Compare cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) measured by clinical assessment and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in pediatric eyes being monitored as glaucoma suspects for suspicious optic disc appearance. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study. Methods: An institutional study following 221 eyes from 122 unique pediatric glaucoma suspects being monitored due to increased or asymmetric appearance of CDR. Ophthalmologic findings, including visual acuity, intraocular pressure, CDR measured by clinical assessment, average retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, and average CDR measured by OCT, were recorded for each participant's initial and final examinations. CDRs measured clinically and by OCT were compared at both initial and final presentations. Results: Average age at presentation was 9.0 years old (95% CI: 8.0-9.9), and mean length of follow-up was 5.0 years (95% CI: 5.4-4.5). At initial presentation, 53 eyes had CDRs recorded by both clinical assessment and OCT, and at final presentation, 93 eyes had CDRs measured by both modalities. CDR measured by OCT was significantly larger than CDR measured clinically on initial and final presentation (p=0.002, p<0.001). Conclusions: Measurements of CDR by clinician assessment were significantly smaller than measurements obtained via OCT imaging. However, the average difference between CDR measured clinically and by OCT was <0.1. Thus, OCT may be a suitable way to measure CDR in pediatric glaucoma suspects, especially when clinical exam proves difficult. Further research is needed to assess CDR in glaucoma suspects using OCT longitudinally and in the context of other optic disc measurements, such as disc area.
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.