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?

William Tasman, MD; Laser ROP Study Group
Philadelphia, Pa

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 reply

We appreciate the opportunity to clarify the issue raised by Dr Bressler. Table 1 in the article by McNamara et al¹ cites 12 cryotherapy-treated and 16 laser-treated eyes. This study was continued, and on November 10, 1992, at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, the results of 38 cryotherapy-treated eyes and 47 laser-treated eyes were reported. The paper, however, was not accepted by Ophthalmology and, therefore, was not published. By the time of the meta-analysis study, the number of eyes in the cryotherapy category had grown to 53 and, in the laser category, to 63.

We believe it was appropriate to cite the 1991 article but welcome this opportunity to clarify the disparity between those numbers and the ones recently reported.² Those used in the meta-analysis were accurate, and thus, the odds ratio as calculated remains unchanged. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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