Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 784

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diurnal Variation of Choroidal Thickness in Normal, Healthy Subjects Measured by Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography

Tan, Colin S., Ouyang, Yanling, Ruiz, Humberto, Sadda, SriniVas R.·2012·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
DOI 10.1167/iovs.11-8782
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the pattern and magnitude of diurnal variation of choroidal thickness (CT), its relation to systemic and ocular factors, and to determine the intervisit reproducibility of diurnal patterns. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 12 healthy volunteers who each underwent sequential ocular imaging on two separate days at five fixed, 2-hour time intervals. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) with enhanced depth imaging and image tracking was performed using a standardized protocol. Choroidal and retinal thicknesses were independently assessed by two masked graders. CT diurnal variation was assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA. RESULTS: A significant diurnal variation in CT was observed, with mean maximum CT of 372.2 μm, minimum of 340.6 μm (P < 0.001), and mean diurnal amplitude of 33.7 μm. Retinal thickness (mean, 235.0 μm) did not exhibit significant diurnal variation (P = 0.621). The amplitude of CT variation was significantly greater for subjects with thicker morning baseline CT compared with those with thin choroids (43.1 vs. 10.5 μm, P < 0.001). There were significant correlations between amplitude of CT and age (P = 0.032), axial length (P < 0.001), and spherical equivalent (P < 0.001). The change in CT also correlated with change in systolic blood pressure (P = 0.031). Comparing CT on two different days, a similar diurnal pattern was observed, with no significant difference between corresponding measurements at the same time points (P = 0.180). CONCLUSIONS: There is significant diurnal variation of CT, with good intervisit reproducibility of diurnal patterns on two different days. The amplitude of variation varies with morning baseline CT, and is correlated with age, axial length, refractive error, and change in systolic blood pressure.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.11-8782

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 784

Metadata

Authors
Tan, C. S., Ouyang, Y., Ruiz, H., & Sadda, S. R.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Publisher
Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO)
Published
2012-01-25
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
261
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
DOI
10.1167/iovs.11-8782
OpenAlex
W2084816571
Cited by
784
References
34
FWCI
35.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.