Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26257509›Full record

ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2015

Noninvasive intraocular pressure monitoring: current insights.

Stefan De Smedt

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Home iCare - What we already know.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Stefan De SmedtDepartment of Ophthalmology, AZ St Maarten, Mechelen, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide and intraocular pressure (IOP) is currently its only modifiable risk factor. Peak IOP has for a long time been considered as a major contributor to glaucoma progression, but its effects may depend not only on its magnitude, but also on its time course. The IOP is nowadays considered to be a dynamic parameter with a circadian rhythm and spontaneous changes. The current practice of punctual measuring the IOP during office hours is therefore a suboptimal approach, which does not take into account the natural fluctuation of IOP. Because of its static nature a single IOP measurement in sitting position fails to document the true range of an individual's IOP, peak IOP, or variation throughout the day. Phasing means monitoring a patient's IOP during the daytime or over a 24-hour period. This can provide additional information in the management of glaucoma patients. This review focuses on the current insight of non-invasive IOP monitoring as a method of obtaining more complete IOP profiles. Invasive techniques using an implantable sensor are beyond the scope of this review.

Indexed as

contact lens sensorglaucomaphasingself-tonometry

Identifiers

PMID26257509
PMCPMC4525787
OpenAlexW1842874620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.