ReviewMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Image Quality as an Important Confounder in Quantitative OCT Angiography: A Review with Quantitative Synthesis.
Review in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOptical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) provides quantitative metrics of the retinal microvasculature, most prominently vessel density (VD), that are increasingly used as biomarkers in ocular, systemic, and cerebrovascular disease. Because OCTA relies on the detection of flow-related motion contrast, image quality has emerged as a pervasive determinant of these metrics, yet its effect has been reported in fragmentary and non-comparable ways across the literature.
methodsWe identified OCTA studies indexed in PubMed that examined the relationship between image quality and quantitative OCTA parameters, and we summarised their methods and findings across the macular, foveal avascular zone, and peripapillary regions and across vascular layers. We integrated directly comparable per-unit scan-quality effects using random-effects meta-analysis and separately synthesized direct cross-sectional Pearson correlations between manufacturer-reported image quality and macular vessel-density outcomes from independent healthy cohorts.
resultsHigher image quality was associated with higher measured vessel density in every contributing dataset. On the Optovue scan-quality (SQ, 0-10) scale, superficial macular VD increased by 3.46% (95% CI 1.85-5.07) per SQ unit in controlled signal-attenuation experiments and by covariate-adjusted observational estimates ranging from 0.90% to 2.16% per SQ unit; a combined order-of-magnitude estimate across both estimator types was 1.64% (95% CI 1.15-2.12). Peripapillary estimates were heterogeneous and derived from only two independent cohorts; they were therefore summarised descriptively rather than pooled. Across three independent externally authored healthy cohorts reporting direct cross-sectional Pearson correlations, higher image quality was strongly associated with higher macular vessel-density outcomes (random-effects pooled r = 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.75;
conclusionsImage quality is an important, directional confounder of VD-based OCTA metrics whose magnitude can rival the biological or physiological signal of interest. Platform-appropriate standardisation, transparent reporting, and consideration of image quality in acquisition and analysis are therefore important for the valid interpretation of vessel-density measurements, particularly in functional and longitudinal studies.
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.