Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 494

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Vessel Density in Healthy, Glaucoma Suspect, and Glaucoma Eyes

Open access
Yarmohammadi, Adeleh, Zangwill, Linda M., Diniz-Filho, Alberto, Suh, Min Hee, Manalastas, Patricia Isabel, Fatehee, Naeem, Yousefi, Siamak, Belghith, Akram, Saunders, Luke J., Medeiros, Felipe A., Huang, David, Weinreb, Robert N.·2016·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
DOI 10.1167/iovs.15-18944
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) retinal vasculature measurements in healthy, glaucoma suspect, and glaucoma patients. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-one eyes of 164 healthy, glaucoma suspect, and open-angle glaucoma (OAG) participants from the Diagnostic Innovations in Glaucoma Study with good quality OCT-A images were included. Retinal vasculature information was summarized as a vessel density map and as vessel density (%), which is the proportion of flowing vessel area over the total area evaluated. Two vessel density measurements extracted from the RNFL were analyzed: (1) circumpapillary vessel density (cpVD) measured in a 750-μm-wide elliptical annulus around the disc and (2) whole image vessel density (wiVD) measured over the entire image. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) were used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Age-adjusted mean vessel density was significantly lower in OAG eyes compared with glaucoma suspects and healthy eyes. (cpVD: 55.1 ± 7%, 60.3 ± 5%, and 64.2 ± 3%, respectively; P < 0.001; and wiVD: 46.2 ± 6%, 51.3 ± 5%, and 56.6 ± 3%, respectively; P < 0.001). For differentiating between glaucoma and healthy eyes, the age-adjusted AUROC was highest for wiVD (0.94), followed by RNFL thickness (0.92) and cpVD (0.83). The AUROCs for differentiating between healthy and glaucoma suspect eyes were highest for wiVD (0.70), followed by cpVD (0.65) and RNFL thickness (0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Optical coherence tomography angiography vessel density had similar diagnostic accuracy to RNFL thickness measurements for differentiating between healthy and glaucoma eyes. These results suggest that OCT-A measurements reflect damage to tissues relevant to the pathophysiology of OAG.

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.15-18944

Cites

21 of 21 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 494

Metadata

Authors
Yarmohammadi, A., Zangwill, L. M., Diniz-Filho, A., Suh, M. H., Manalastas, P. I., Fatehee, N., Yousefi, S., Belghith, A., Saunders, L. J., Medeiros, F. A., Huang, D., & Weinreb, R. N.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Publisher
Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO)
Published
2016-07-13
Volume
57
Issue
9
Pages
OCT451
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
DOI
10.1167/iovs.15-18944
OpenAlex
W2473577401
Cited by
494
References
21
FWCI
57.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.