Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27446266›Full record

ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016

Assessment of pupillary light reflex using a smartphone application.

Young Duck Shin, Jin Ho Bae, Eun Jung Kwon, Hyeon Tae Kim, Tae-Soo Lee, Young Jin Choi

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Internet, Apps, and the Anesthesiologist.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  10. Pilot Study of Smartphone Infrared Pupillography and Pupillometry.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022
    Article
  11. Interdevice Agreement between a Smartphone and a Commercial Pupillometer.International journal of applied & basic medical research
    Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Young Duck ShinDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Jin Ho BaeDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Eun Jung KwonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Hyeon Tae KimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Tae-Soo LeeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Young Jin ChoiDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do 361-763, Republic of Korea.
Chungbuk National University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In unconscious patients, pupillary light reflex is an indicator of brain damage. In the current study, a smartphone application was developed for the purpose of measuring pupillary light reflex with an aim to determine the agreement between pupillary light reflex measurements using a smartphone application (APP) and a penlight (PEN). The APP acquires five sequential photographs using the camera flash in order to stimulate the pupil. The initial image is captured prior to the flash, and the subsequent image is obtained while the flash is on. The remaining three images are captured whilst the flash is off. Pupillary right reflex was assessed in 30 healthy subjects using a PEN. After 10 min, the examiners inspected the images of light reflex acquired from the same subjects using the APP, and completed the corresponding questionnaire containing details of pupil size and degree of response. Agreement between the two assessment methods was determined by calculating bias, limits of agreement, and the intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient. A statistically significant difference was not observed between the two methods regarding pupil size and degree of response. Bias was 0.1 mm and limits of agreement were ±1.5 mm, as compared with PEN. ICC was 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.96). Therefore, it may be concluded that the results of pupillary light reflex assessed by PEN and APP display no significant difference. Furthermore, the APP provides advantages such as portability, objectivity and the possibility of being used as objective medical evidence.

Indexed as

cell phonemobile applicationpupillary reflex

Identifiers

PMID27446266
PMCPMC4950215
OpenAlexW2401481418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.