This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Susan B. Bressler, MD
Baltimore, Md

Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113(2):137.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In the letter on laser therapy for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP),¹ the article by McNamara et al,² which is referenced by the Laser ROP Study Group in Table 1 of the letter, is reported to include 53 eyes in the cryotherapy group and 63 eyes in the laser therapy group.¹ However, Table 1 of the original publication reports 12 eyes treated with cryotherapy and 16 eyes treated with laser photocoagulation,² for a total of 28 eyes rather than 116 eyes. Can the Laser ROP Study Group account for this discrepancy, and does the meta-analysis change if the numbers from the original publication are used in the meta-analysis? . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?