The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detection of Macular Ganglion Cell Loss in Glaucoma by Fourier-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography
Open accessAbstract
Purpose To map ganglion cell complex thickness with high-speed Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) and compute novel macular parameters for glaucoma diagnosis. Design Observational, cross-sectional study. Participants One hundred seventy-eight participants in the Advanced Imaging for Glaucoma Study, divided into three groups: 65 persons in the normal group (N), 78 in the perimetric glaucoma group (PG), and 52 in the pre-perimetric glaucoma group (PPG). Methods The RTVue FD-OCT system was used to map the macula over a 7×6 mm region. The macular OCT images were exported for automatic segmentation using software we developed. The program measured macular retinal (MR) thickness and ganglion cell complex (GCC) thickness. The GCC was defined as the combination of nerve fiber, ganglion cell, and inner plexiform layers. Pattern analysis was applied to the GCC map and the diagnostic power of pattern-based diagnostic parameters were investigated. Results were compared to time-domain (TD) Stratus OCT measurements of MR and circumpapillary nerve fiber layer (NFL) thickness. Main Outcome Measures Repeatability was assessed by intraclass correlation (ICC), pooled standard deviation, and coefficient of variation. Diagnostic power was assessed by the area under the receiver operator characteristic (AROC) curve. Measurements in the PG group were the primary measures of performance. Results The FD-OCT measurements of MR and GCC averages had significantly better repeatability than TD-OCT measurements of MR and NFL averages. The FD-OCT GCC average had significantly (P=0.02) higher diagnostic power (AROC = 0.90) than MR (AROC = 0.85 for both FD-OCT & TD-OCT) in differentiating between PG and N. One GCC pattern parameter, global loss volume, had significantly higher AROC (0.92) than the overall average (P=0.01). The diagnostic powers of the best GCC parameters were statistically equal to TD-OCT NFL average. Conclusions The higher speed and resolution of FD-OCT improved the repeatability of macular imaging compared to standard TD-OCT. Ganglion cell mapping and pattern analysis improved diagnostic power. The improved diagnostic power of macular GCC imaging is on par with, and complementary to, peripapillary NFL imaging. Macular imaging with FD-OCT is a useful method for glaucoma diagnosis and has potential for tracking glaucoma progression.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M., & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. (1988) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531595 · Cited by 22,649
(2005) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/0-387-27255-0_9 · Cited by 20,133
Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models
LIANG, K.-Y., & ZEGER, S. L. (1986) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/73.1.13 · Cited by 18,550
Huang, D., Swanson, E. A., Lin, C. P., Schuman, J. S., Stinson, W. G., Chang, W., Hee, M. R., Flotte, T., Gregory, K., Puliafito, C. A., et al. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1957169 · Cited by 13,788
Self-citationRandom-Effects Models for Longitudinal Data
Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529876 · Cited by 8,923
Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. (1999) · Cited by 6,832
Christensen, R. (1990) · Springer Texts in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4111-7_10 · Cited by 2,923
A Note on Robust Variance Estimation for Cluster‐Correlated Data
Williams, R. L. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00645.x · Cited by 2,501
Performance of fourier domain vs time domain optical coherence tomography
Leitgeb, R., Hitzenberger, C., & Fercher, A. (2003) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.11.000889 · Cited by 1,854
Sensitivity advantage of swept source and Fourier domain optical coherence tomography
Choma, M., Sarunic, M., Yang, C., & Izatt, J. (2003) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.11.002183 · Cited by 1,794
Cited by
Glaucomatous damage of the macula
Hood, D. C., Raza, A. S., de Moraes, C. G. V., Liebmann, J. M., & Ritch, R. (2013) · Progress in Retinal and Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.preteyeres.2012.08.003 · Cited by 867
Saidha, S., Syc, S. B., Durbin, M. K., Eckstein, C., Oakley, J. D., Meyer, S. A., Conger, A., Frohman, T. C., Newsome, S., Ratchford, J. N., et al. (2011) · Multiple Sclerosis Journal · doi:10.1177/1352458511418630 · Cited by 296
Ganglion Cell Loss in Relation to Visual Disability in Multiple Sclerosis
Walter, S. D., Ishikawa, H., Galetta, K. M., Sakai, R. E., Feller, D. J., Henderson, S. B., Wilson, J. A., Maguire, M. G., Galetta, S. L., Frohman, E., et al. (2012) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.11.032 · Cited by 294
Self-citationSalehi, M. A., Nowroozi, A., Gouravani, M., Mohammadi, S., & Arevalo, J. F. (2022) · Survey of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2021.07.007 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Tan, O., Chopra, V., Lu, A. T.-H., Schuman, J. S., Ishikawa, H., Wollstein, G., Varma, R., & Huang, D.
- Venue
- Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2305-2314.e2
- ISSN
- 0161-6420 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2135863371
- Cited by
- 665
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 34.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Detection of Macular Ganglion Cell Loss in Glaucoma by Fourier-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.05.025
- The paper
- Tan, O., Chopra, V., Lu, A. T.-H., Schuman, J. S., Ishikawa, H., Wollstein, G., Varma, R., & Huang, D. (2009). Detection of Macular Ganglion Cell Loss in Glaucoma by Fourier-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography. Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.05.025
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.