English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of in vivo confocal microscopic neuroanalysis by beginners using manual and automated modules. Images of sub-basal corneal nerve plexus (SCNP) from 108 images of 18 healthy participants were analyzed by 7 beginner observers using manual (CCMetrics, [CCM]) and automated (ACCMetrics, [ACCM]) module. SCNP parameters analyzed included corneal nerve fiber density (NFD), corneal nerve branch density (NBD), corneal nerve fiber length (NFL), and tortuosity coefficient (TC). The intra-observer repeatability, inter-observer reliability, inter-module agreement, and left–right eye symmetry level of SCNP parameters were examined. All observers showed good intra-observer repeatability using CCM (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.60 for all), except when measuring TC. Two observers demonstrated especially excellent repeatability in analyzing NFD, NBD, and NFL using manual mode, indicating the quality of interpretation may still be observer-dependent. Among all SCNP parameters, NFL had the best inter-observer reliability (Spearman’s rank-sum correlation coefficient [SpCC] and ICC > 0.85 for the 3 original observers) and left–right symmetry level (SpCC and ICC > 0.60). In the additional analysis of inter-observer reliability using results by all 7 observers, only NFL showed good inter-observer reliability (ICC = 0.79). Compared with CCM measurements, values of ACCM measurements were significantly lower, implying a poor inter-module agreement. Our result suggested that performance of quantitative corneal neuroanalysis by beginners maybe acceptable, with NFL being the most reliable parameter, and automated method cannot fully replace manual work.

Comparing the results of manual and automated quantitative corneal neuroanalysing modules for beginners