ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Classification of diabetic macular edema cases based on optical coherence tomography images and evaluation of morphological features.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to classify DME morphologically using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to assess the impact of selected OCT biomarkers on DME subtypes.
methodsOCT images of patients with DME categorized into three groups as diffuse macular edema (dME), cystoid macular edema (CME) and cystoid degeneration (CD). Presence of subretinal fluid (SRF), disorganization of inner retinal layers (DRIL), ellipsoid zone (EZ) damage, external limiting membrane (ELM) damage, exudates, hyperreflective dots (HRD), epiretinal membrane (ERM) and vitreomacular traction (VMT) were evaluated. The effect of OCT findings on DME type was examined and factors affecting visual acuity were evaluated in this retrospective, cross-sectional study.
results746 eyes of 538 patients were evaluated and 55.1% were in the CME group, 40.6% in dME and 3.8% in the CD group. It was observed that the integrity of ELM and EZ was impaired in 11.58% and 11.09%, respectively. When SRF, DRIL, HRD, exudates, VMT and ERM were examined, the rates of 16.7%, 19.23%, 28.83%, 54.40%, 2.76% and 15.8% were obtained, respectively. The CD group had the weakest visual acuity, while the dME group had the greatest (P < 0.001). While SRF, HRD, and exudates were most common in CME; DRIL, ELM and EZ damages were most common in the CD group (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe group with the lowest visual acuity and the most damage to the outer retinal layers is the CD group. Presence of SRF, DRIL, HRD, exudate and ERM are also among the reasons that decrease visual acuity in 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.