ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2026
Axial length correction in retinal thickness measurements in diabetic retinopathy.
Article in Japanese journal of 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo use the RS-1 Glauvas (NIDEK) system to evaluate the effect of axial length (AL) correction on retinal thickness (RT) with optical coherence tomography (OCT). STUDY
designObservational, cross-sectional study.
methodsBetween November 2023 and April 2024, 165 eyes from patients with diabetes underwent OCT imaging. RT was measured with and without AL-based magnification correction with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) grid, which comprises three concentric circles (diameters; 1, 3, and 6 mm), with the inner and outer rings divided into superior, temporal, nasal, and inferior sectors. Measurements were calculated using two settings: a fixed AL of 24 mm (uncorrected) and the individually measured AL for each eye (corrected). The difference between uncorrected and corrected RT measurements was analyzed using Bland-Altman analysis. Linear regression analysis was performed to assess the association between AL and the measurement difference.
resultsThe mean AL was 23.9 ± 1.2 mm. Bland-Altman analysis for central subfield thickness (CST) showed a small mean difference between corrected and uncorrected measurements (bias -0.34 µm; 95% limits of agreement -6.32 to 5.63 µm). Linear regression demonstrated a significant positive association between AL and the difference in CST measurements (R
conclusionAL differences affect the effective OCT scan area and may influence RT measurements. Applying AL correction minimizes measurement bias caused by transverse magnification and improves the accuracy of RT assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42371272What 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.