Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Retina. 2014 Dec;34(12):2346–2358. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000249

TABLE 3.

Drusen and GA over-estimated ratio (unit: %) in SVP, CFP, and the proposed method (“Ours”) compared with the gold standard. The maximum over-estimated ratios for each method are shown in bold.

Image Patient 1 Patient 2 Patient 3 Mean
Reader 1 Drusen SVP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
CFP 39.0 52.9 200.0 97.3
Ours 29.3 26.5 11.1 22.3
GA SVP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
CFP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
Ours 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
Reader 2 Drusen SVP 3.23 0.0 0.0 1.08
CFP 71.0 51.9 266.7 129.9
Ours 41.9 11.1 16.7 23.2
GA SVP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
CFP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
Ours 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
Readers 1 & 2 Drusen SVP 3.85 0.0 0.0 1.28
CFP 88.5 84.6 225.0 132.7
Ours 61.5 42.3 12.5 38.8
GA SVP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
CFP 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3
Ours 0.0 100.0 0.0 33.3