ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Influence of ocular biometry on peripheral retinal visualization: a comparative study of Clarus and Optos widefield imaging systems.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose was to compare the Clarus 500 and Optos Daytona widefield imaging systems with respect to the farthest clinically assessable peripheral retinal structure in each quadrant, and to evaluate whether ocular biometry, particularly axial length and spherical equivalent, influences device specific widefield performance.
methodsTwenty-six eyes underwent same day widefield imaging with Clarus 500 (Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) and Optos Daytona (Optos plc, Dunfermline, UK). For each quadrant, the most peripheral anatomically interpretable structure was identified, and device differences were analyzed using McNemar tests. Associations with axial length and spherical equivalent, were evaluated using Mann-Whitney U tests and univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to assess the predictive value of axial length and to determine the optimal cutoff for device superiority.
resultsBoth widefield systems showed similar performance in the superior temporal, inferior temporal, and inferior nasal quadrants with no statistically significant differences. In the superior nasal quadrant, however, eyes in which Clarus reached farther had significantly longer axial length (23.97 ± 1.62 mm versus 22.53 ± 0.94 mm, p = 0.016) and a more myopic spherical equivalent (- 2.05 ± 4.52 D versus + 2.69 ± 2.56 D, p = 0.019). Axial length significantly predicted cases in which Clarus reached farther into the periphery in univariate regression (odds ratio 2.39, p = 0.033). Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated good discriminatory ability of axial length with an area under the curve of 0.782 and an optimal cutoff of 23.77 mm. Shorter and hyperopic eyes showed a tendency toward greater peripheral reach with Optos, although this trend did not achieve statistical significance.
conclusionAn axial length cutoff value of 23.77 mm was identified as a threshold for device-specific differences in peripheral retinal visualization. Device differences become apparent in the superior nasal quadrant, where axial elongation and myopic ocular geometry were associated with greater peripheral reach of the Clarus system, while no statistically supported advantage for Optos is observed in shorter or hyperopic eyes. Overall, the Clarus 500 and Optos Daytona provide comparable peripheral visualization in most retinal quadrants. These findings should be interpreted in the context of the exploratory study design.
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.