. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 May 15.

Published in final edited form as: J Neurosci Methods. 2010 Feb 26;188(2):250–257. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.02.018

Table 2.

Comparison of OCT and histology results – Transplant lamination

	Laminated area	Large laminated area + rosettes^**	Rosettes + small laminated area^***	Rosettes only
OCT (N = 137)	66	27	39	71
OCT (% of total)	48%	20%	28%	52%
Histology (N = 141)	68	35	33	70
Histology (% of total)	48%	25%	23%	50%
	Laminated areas missed (large & small)	Large laminated area missed	Small laminated area missed	Lamination in OCT, but not in sections
Features missed by OCT	18^*	11	14	13
% mistake rate	13%	8%	10%	9%
Accuracy rate	87%	92%	90%	91%

Experiments where a lamination area was estimated too large or too small are not included.

^**

Large laminated area: lamination in most of cross-section

^***

Small laminated area: less than 30% in cross-section

N = total # of experiments minus experiments without transplant.