Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Correction to: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
The authors would like to fully acknowledge that in error two incorrect statements were made.
The first incorrect statement is:
A Cochrane review by Jindal et al (2020) assessed non-contact tests for angle closure but did not compare against gonioscopy as a reference standard.
A systematic review and meta-analysis that was published in the Cochrane Library in May 2020 [1], evaluated a range of non-contact tests that including anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) for the detection of an occludable angle. For all 47 studies included in the review (including the 27 AS-OCT studies) the authors compared their accuracy to a gonioscopic reference standard.
The published paper found 23 studies that evaluated AS-OCT to gonioscopy whereas in the Cochrane review by Jindal et al., they investigated 27 studies that evaluated AS-OCT compared to the reference standard of gonioscopy, therefore this that may affect the published paper's findings. Furthermore the published paper has not discussed how their meta-analysis, discussion and conclusions differs from the published Cochrane review by Jindal et al.
In the current review it was reported that 'AS-OCT allows for earlier detection and provides a tool for screening where there is very little else available.' This statement is contrary to the findings of the Cochrane library [1] where the meta-analysis and comparisons of non-contact tests demonstrated that LACD had superior specificity to AS-OCT and similar sensitivity. Furthermore it is generally acknowledged that LACD is a test that can be performed without the need of additional equipment and where a conventional slit-lamp can be used therefore LACD is particularly applicable in settings where costs may be a barrier for implementation.
The second incorrect statement is:
'Our review has been the first to perform a meta-analysis of data that assesses the accuracy of AS-OCT for detecting angle closure against gonioscopy as a reference standard.
The authors would also like to confirm that Jindal et al. published the first systematic review to include a meta analysis of the accuracy of AS-OCT against a gonioscopic reference standard.
Reference
Jindal A, Ctori I, Virgili G, Lucenteforte E, Lawrenson JG (2020) Non-contact tests for identifying people at risk of primary angle closure glaucoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5(5):CD012947. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012947.pub2
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05271-4
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Desmond, T., Tran, V., Maharaj, M. et al. Correction to: Diagnostic accuracy of AS-OCT vs gonioscopy for detecting angle closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 260, 385 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05432-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05432-5