Recommendations for OCT Angiography Reporting in Retinal Vascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a consensus nomenclature for reporting OCT angiography (OCTA) findings in retinal vascular disease (e.g., diabetic retinopathy, retinal vein occlusion) by international experts. DESIGN: Delphi-based survey. SUBJECTS, PARTICIPANTS, AND/OR CONTROLS: Twenty-five retinal vascular disease and OCTA imaging experts. METHODS, INTERVENTION, OR TESTING: A Delphi method of consensus development was used, comprising 2 rounds of online questionnaires, followed by a face-to-face meeting conducted virtually. Twenty-five experts in retinal vascular disease and retinal OCTA imaging were selected to constitute the OCTA Nomenclature in Delphi Study Group for retinal vascular disease. The 4 main areas of consensus were: definition of the parameters of "wide-field (WF)" OCTA, measurement of decreased vascular flow on conventional and WF-OCTA, nomenclature of OCTA findings, and OCTA in retinal vascular disease management and staging. The study end point was defined by the degree of consensus for each question: "strong consensus" was defined as ≥85% agreement, "consensus" as 80% to 84%, and "near consensus" as 70% to 79%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consensus and near consensus on OCTA nomenclature in retinal vascular disease. RESULTS: A consensus was reached that a meaningful change in percentage of flow on WF-OCTA imaging should be an increase or decrease ≥30% of the absolute imaged area of flow signal and that a "large area" of WF-OCTA reduced flow signal should also be defined as ≥30% of the absolute imaged area. The presence of new vessels and intraretinal microvascular abnormalities, the foveal avascular zone parameters, the presence and amount of "no-flow areas," and the assessment of vessel density in various retinal layers should be added for the staging and classification of diabetic retinopathy. Decreased flow ≥30% of the absolute imaged area should define an ischemic central retinal vein occlusion. Several other items did not meet consensus requirements or were rejected in the final discussion round. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides international consensus recommendations for reporting OCTA findings in retinal vascular disease, which may help to improve the interpretability and description in clinic and clinical trials. Further validation in these settings is warranted and ongoing. Efforts are continuing to address unresolved questions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.178 | 0.367 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".