The analysis of intersession repeatability was included for two reasons: first, to evaluate whether there are more metrologically preferred retinal areas for measurements in future studies. These are areas that exhibit lower CR values. Second, the repeatability of these choroidal metrics is put into context of commonly found effect sizes. To address the first question, the nasal extended area manifests the highest CR with 20.33 µm compared to the other ETDRS sectors (10.37–16.35 µm). One earlier publication reported an average CR of 30 µm for ChT with automated segmentation in swept-source volume scans but without differentiating between ETDRS areas.
54 Moreover, another methodologically similar study found the opposite for spectral-domain OCT scans, with the best repeatability in the nasal sectors due to thinner choroids and thus advantageous imaging properties.
42 However, comparisons to other past literature are limited, since the range of methodologies used and analyses reported are broad. In contrast to ChT, repeatability of CVI measurements did not show any regional variations, surprisingly not even in the extended nasal subfield. Therefore, CVI can be measured irrespective of the retinal region from a metrologic perspective. There are few published reports on the repeatability of CVI measurements and all limited to spectral-domain and line scan analysis, making comparisons to the present study difficult. Moreover, these commonly evaluate the repeatability of luminal and stromal areas separately, which causes difficulties when translating it to repeatability results of final and summarized CVI measurements. However, the somewhat most comparable study found 95% limits of agreements ranging from approximately −4% to +3%.
49 From a relative perspective, however, ChT exhibits a better repeatability compared to the absolute thickness than CVI (
Table 3). This finding is in line with another study in healthy participants.
12 There has not been a definite theory for this relation yet. However, one hypothesis suggests that the repeatability of CVI is dependent on the repeatability of ChT as a first and inherent processing step. Therefore, this finding can be expected. The second step was to compare reported effect sizes with measurement variability. Only if the CR does not exceed the effect size can measurement noise be neglected as a source of error. Typical reported differences between healthy and disease conditions are around 2% to 6% for CVI (review: Agrawal et al.
11). For ChT, the effect size is highly dependent on the condition studied. In retinal disease, ChT alterations of around 100 µm are commonly found.
3–5 However, in myopia research, the measurement reliability is similar to or even exceeds published effect sizes of maximally 20 µm (review: Read et al.
55), even when using swept-source OCT technology with improved choroidal imaging. In summary, measurement repeatability should be carefully considered when interpreting “true” change or difference in both choroidal parameters and distinguishing from measurement variation.