Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 6;1(1):100005. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2021.100005

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Bland-Altman plots demonstrating interdevice and intermethod agreement between the Optos200 and Heidelberg systems and between 30° × 30° and 55° × 55° imaging methods on the Heidelberg system (Optos200 vs. Heidelberg 30° × 30°, Heidelberg 55° × 55° vs. Heidelberg 30° × 30°, and Heidelberg 55° × 55° vs. Optos200) for (A1, B1, C1) definitely decreased autofluorescence (DDAF) area as well as (A2, B2, C2) DDAF square root area (SRA). The solid line indicates the mean difference and the dashed lines indicate the 95% limits of agreement. Overall, Optos200 and Heidelberg 30° × 30° DDAF SRA showed similar results.