Next Article in Journal
Clinical Significance of TNFRSF1A36T/C Polymorphism in Cachectic Patients with Chronic Heart Failure
Previous Article in Journal
Globotrioasylsphingosine Levels and Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography in Fabry Disease Patients
Previous Article in Special Issue
Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography of Peripapillary Vessel Density in Multiple Sclerosis and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder: A Comparative Study
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Swept Source Optical Coherence Tomography Analysis of the Selected Eye’s Anterior Segment Parameters

J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(5), 1094; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10051094
by Michał Dembski 1,2,*, Anna Nowińska 2, Klaudia Ulfik-Dembska 1,2 and Edward Wylęgała 1,2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(5), 1094; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10051094
Submission received: 24 January 2021 / Revised: 23 February 2021 / Accepted: 1 March 2021 / Published: 5 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Optical Coherence Tomography in Clinic Diagnosis, Therapy and Surgery)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

You did not show the data of the cataract in these participants who are

relatively older. Cataract influences the depth of anterior chamber.

Are there any contact lens users or keratoconus patients?

I think the number of 166 volunteers is not enough to conclude your result. Please calculate the power of the number for the study.

Please provide refraction of the volunteers, because it is really important to discuss the depth of anterior chamber.

Intra ocular pressure is also important factor to study the corneal thickness.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I read with interest the manuscript entitled "Swept source optical coherence tomography analysis of the selected eye’s anterior segment parameters."

The overal manuscript is well written and organized.

However, the authors should address the following issues:

The authors state that the measurements were repeated three short times, thus I expected an evaluaiton of intra-visit repeatability;

the patients are relatively older, the authors should specify the reasons, e.g., if they have been recruited among eye services for AMD or cataract. This issue should be addressed a limit.

The authors stated that some parameters are non normally distributed. For these parameters, median and interquartile range would be reported.  

The authors stated that the small sample did not enable to evaluate the parameters according to age categories. I suggest to explore the relantionship of each parameter with age, considering  

Since several comparisons have been done and reported, the authors should consider to correct for multiple comparison.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachement.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Please provide the words of :Women (n=92) Men (n=74) in abstract, too.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop