Falavarjani Khalil Ghasemi, Anvari Pasha, Alemzadeh Sayyed Amirpooya, Moghaddam Mohammad Mehdi Johari, Habibi Abbas, Ashrafkhorasani Maryam
Eye Research Center, Department of Ophthalmology, The Five Senses Health Institute, Rassoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
J Curr Ophthalmol. 2022 Nov 30;34(3):273-276. doi: 10.4103/joco.joco_174_22. eCollection 2022 Jul-Sep.
To assess the percentage of published articles reporting optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) metrics regarding the report of segmentation error correction.
A comprehensive search was conducted using the PubMed database for articles on OCTA imaging published between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2021. All original articles reporting at least one of the OCTA metrics were extracted. The article text was reviewed for the segmentation correction strategy. In addition, the number of articles that mentioned the lack of segmentation error correction as a limitation of the study was recorded.
From the initial 5288 articles, 1559 articles were included for detailed review. One hundred ninety-six articles (12.57%) used manual correction for segmentation errors. Of the remaining articles, 589 articles (37.8%) excluded images with significant segmentation errors, and 99 articles (6.3%) mentioned segmentation errors as a limitation of their study. The rest of the articles (675, 43.3%) did not address the segmentation error. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that ignorance of segmentation error was significantly associated with lower journal ranks, earlier years of publication and disease category of age-related macular degeneration, and glaucoma (all < 0.001).
A significant proportion of peer-reviewed articles in PubMed, disregarded the segmentation error correction. The conclusions of such studies should be interpreted with caution. Editors, reviewers, and authors of OCTA articles should pay special attention to the correction of segmentation errors.
评估已发表文章中报告光学相干断层扫描血管造影（OCTA）指标时关于分割误差校正报告的比例。
使用PubMed数据库对2015年1月1日至2021年1月1日期间发表的关于OCTA成像的文章进行全面检索。提取所有报告至少一项OCTA指标的原创文章。对文章正文进行审查以了解分割校正策略。此外，记录提及缺乏分割误差校正作为研究局限性的文章数量。
从最初的5288篇文章中，纳入1559篇进行详细审查。196篇文章（12.57%）对分割误差采用手动校正。在其余文章中，589篇文章（37.8%）排除了具有明显分割误差的图像，99篇文章（6.3%）提及分割误差作为其研究的局限性。其余文章（675篇，43.3%）未涉及分割误差。多因素逻辑回归分析显示，忽视分割误差与期刊排名较低、发表年份较早以及年龄相关性黄斑变性和青光眼的疾病类别显著相关（均<0.001）。
PubMed中相当一部分经过同行评审的文章忽视了分割误差校正。此类研究的结论应谨慎解读。OCTA文章的编辑、审稿人和作者应特别注意分割误差的校正。
