{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0315955766192733, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023696682464454975, 'mean_word_length': 4.8119266055045875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Corrective change of retinal thickness measured by optical coherence tomography and histologic studies.

PURPOSE
To evaluate the correlation of retinal thickness between optical coherence tomography (OCT) images and histologic slides.


METHODS
Retinal thickness was measured in 16 rabbit retinal histologic slides. The same eyes had been previously measured by OCT for the comparison of results between two methods. Retinal thickness of each OCT image section was measured using both the manually assisted (requiring localization of reflectivity peaks by observer) and automated modes of the computer software.


RESULTS
Retinal thickness measured by OCT demonstrated a high degree of correlation with retinal histologic study. The automated method (Cc = 0.66, P < 0.01) was less reliable than the manually assisted one (Cc = 0.84, P < 0.001). The former had an error in 95% confidence interval, ranged between -0.71 and 11.09 microns. The latter had a less error, ranged from -2.99 to 5.13 microns.


CONCLUSION
OCT can quantitatively measure the retinal thickness. However, automatical identification of the reflective boundaries by computer may result in errors in some cases. To measure the retinal thickness by manually assisted mode can increase the accuracy.