ArticlePloS one2022
Linear interactions between intraocular, intracranial pressure, and retinal vascular pulse amplitude in the fourier domain.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying Lateral Pulsation in Retinal Vessels Within the Optic Disc.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Retinal Perfusion and Injury in Sepsis and after Major Surgery.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Evidence for the Existence of Two Opposing Pulse Waves in Retinal Vein Segments Within the Optic Disc.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Non-linear interactions between intraocular, intracranial pressure and the retinal vascular pulse amplitude in the Fourier domain.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Calculation of vessel pulse wave velocities in retinal vein segments within the optic disc centre.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Utilizing retinal arteriole/venule ratio to estimate intracranial pressure.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Article
- Probability density and information entropy of machine learning derived intracranial pressure predictions.PloS one · 2024Article
- Empirical retinal venous pulse wave velocity using modified photoplethysmography.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- Non-Invasive Intracranial Pressure Monitoring.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- A machine learning approach in the non-invasive prediction of intracranial pressure using Modified Photoplethysmography.PloS one · 2022Article
- Characterization of Ocular Sonography Findings and their Relationship to Clinical Features from a South Indian Cohort of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension.Annals of Indian Academy of NeurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the retinal vascular pulsatile characteristics in subjects with normal (ICPn) and high (ICPh) intracranial pressure and quantify the interactions between intraocular pressure, intracranial pressure, and retinal vascular pulse amplitude in the Fourier domain. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-one subjects were examined using modified photoplethysmography with simultaneous ophthalmodynamometry. A harmonic regression model was fitted to each pixel in the time-series, and used to quantify the retinal vascular pulse wave parameters including the harmonic regression wave amplitude (HRWa). The pulse wave attenuation was measured under different ranges of induced intraocular pressure (IOPi), as a function of distance along the vessel (VDist). Intracranial pressure (ICP) was measured using lumbar puncture. A linear mixed-effects model was used to estimate the correlations between the Yeo-Johnson transformed harmonic regression wave amplitude (HRWa-YJt) with the predictors (IOPi, VDist and ICP). A comparison of the model coefficients was done by calculating the weighted Beta (βx) coefficients.
resultsThe median HRWa in the ICPn group was higher in the retinal veins (4.563, interquartile range (IQR) = 3.656) compared to the retinal arteries (3.475, IQR = 2.458), p<0.0001. In contrast, the ICPh group demonstrated a reduction in the median venous HRWa (3.655, IQR = 3.223) and an elevation in the median arterial HRWa (3.616, IQR = 2.715), p<0.0001. Interactions of the pulsation amplitude with ICP showed a significant disordinal interaction and the loss of a main effect of the Fourier sine coefficient (bn1) in the ICPh group, suggesting that this coefficient reflects the retinal vascular response to ICP wave. The linear mixed-effects model (LME) showed the decay in the venous (HRWa-YJt) was almost twice that in the retinal arteries (-0.067±0.002 compared to -0.028±0.0021 respectively, p<0.00001). The overall interaction models had a total explanatory power of (conditional R2) 38.7%, and 42% of which the fixed effects explained 8.8%, and 5.8% of the variance (marginal R2) for the venous and arterial models respectively. A comparison of the damping effect of VDist and ICP showed that ICP had less influence on pulse decay than distance in the retinal arteries (βICP = -0.21, se = ±0.017 compared to [Formula: see text], se = ±0.019), whereas the mean value was equal for the retinal veins (venous [Formula: see text], se = ±0.015, βICP = -0.42, se = ±0.019).
conclusionThe retinal vascular pulsation characteristics in the ICPh group showed high retinal arterial and low venous pulsation amplitudes. Interactions between retinal vascular pulsation amplitude and ICP suggest that the Fourier sine coefficient bn1 reflects the retinal vascular response to the ICP wave. Although a matrix of regression lines showed high linear characteristics, the low model explanatory power precludes its use as a predictor of ICP. These results may guide future predictive modelling in non-invasive estimation of ICP using modified photoplethysmography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.