Abstract

Communications are short papers. Appropriate material for this section includes reports of incidental research results, comments on papers previously published, and short descriptions of theoretical and experimental techniques. Communications are handled much the same as regular papers. Proofs are provided.

In a recent paper, Koretz et al. [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21, 346 (2004) ] conclude that the results of the “corrected Scheimpflug technique” to obtain the shape of the human lens differ significantly from their magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. We demonstrate that the conclusions are based on incorrect statistical methods. A straightforward statistical comparison shows that there is no significant difference between the corrected Scheimpflug results and the MRI data.

© 2005 Optical Society of America

Reply to comment on “Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study”

Jane F. Koretz, Susan A. Strenk, and Lawrence M. Strenk
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(6) 1219-1220 (2005)

Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study

Jane F. Koretz, Susan A. Strenk, Lawrence M. Strenk, and John L. Semmlow
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21(3) 346-354 (2004)

Variable aberration generators using rotated Zernike plates

Eva Acosta and Salvador Bará
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(9) 1993-1996 (2005)

Methods to obtain quantitative parametric descriptions of the optical surfaces of the human crystalline lens from Scheimpflug slit-lamp images. I. Image processing methods

Christopher A. Cook and Jane F. Koretz
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15(6) 1473-1485 (1998)

In vivo anterior segment imaging in the rat eye with high speed white light full-field optical coherence tomography

Kate Grieve, Arnaud Dubois, Manuel Simonutti, Michel Paques, José Sahel, Jean-François Le Gargasson, and Claude Boccara
Opt. Express 13(16) 6286-6295 (2005)