ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Diagnostic performance of conventional optical coherence tomography parameters for differentiating pediatric papilledema from pseudopapilledema.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of conventional optical coherence tomography (OCT)-derived peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GC-IPL) thickness measurements for differentiating papilledema from pseudopapilledema in children.
methodsThis retrospective study included 115 pediatric patients (230 eyes) with papilledema, optic disc drusen (ODD)-related pseudopapilledema, pseudopapilledema without optic disc drusen, and healthy controls. Peripapillary RNFL and macular GC-IPL thicknesses were measured using spectral-domain OCT. Group comparisons were performed using generalized estimating equations, and diagnostic performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis.
resultsThe study included 26 patients (52 eyes) with papilledema, 30 patients (60 eyes) with optic disc drusen (ODD)-related pseudopapilledema, 32 patients (64 eyes) with pseudopapilledema without ODD, and 27 healthy controls (HCs) (54 eyes). Mean pRNFL thickness was 129.85 ± 51.08 μm in the papilledema group, 128.22 ± 36.78 μm in the ODD-related pseudopapilledema group, 106.64 ± 17.10 μm in the pseudopapilledema without ODD group, and 99.89 ± 11.29 μm in the healthy control group. Compared with HCs, RNFL thickness was significantly increased in all quadrants in eyes with ODD-related pseudopapilledema, in three quadrants in papilledema, and only in the superior quadrant in pseudopapilledema without ODD. Compared with HCs, inferior RNFL demonstrated the highest discriminatory ability for papilledema (AUC = 0.848, p < 0.001) and ODD-related pseudopapilledema (AUC = 0.906, p < 0.001), whereas superior RNFL showed significant discrimination for pseudopapilledema without ODD (AUC = 0.720, p = 0.001). For differentiating papilledema from ODD-related pseudopapilledema, nasal RNFL yielded the highest AUC among the evaluated RNFL parameters (AUC = 0.699, p = 0.005). For papilledema versus pseudopapilledema without ODD, inferior RNFL demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.732, p < 0.001), followed by temporal RNFL (AUC = 0.710, p = 0.002). Several GC-IPL parameters demonstrated significant discriminatory ability in specific comparisons, with inferonasal GC-IPL showing the highest AUC for ODD-related pseudopapilledema versus healthy controls (AUC = 0.731, p = 0.004) and superotemporal GC-IPL showing the highest AUC for papilledema versus ODD-related pseudopapilledema (AUC = 0.769, p = 0.001).
conclusionsConventional OCT-derived RNFL measurements demonstrated limited diagnostic performance for distinguishing pediatric papilledema from pseudopapilledema, particularly in eyes with ODD-related pseudopapilledema. OCT findings should therefore be interpreted together with clinical assessment and, where available, advanced optic nerve head imaging techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42920120What 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.