Observational studyInternational ophthalmology2018
Comparison of biometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image-Guided System versus the auto-refracto-keratometer.
Observational study in International ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Image-guided lens extraction surgery: a systematic review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2019Review
- Influence of AngleJournal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Intraoperative Aberrometer Plus Image-guided System for Astigmatism Correction Compared to Standard Image-guided System for Significant Lens Opacity.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the biometric measurements obtained from the Verion Image-Guided System to those obtained by auto-refracto-keratometer in normal eyes.
methodsThis is a prospective, observational, comparative study conducted at the Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México I.A.P., Mexico. Three sets of keratometry measurements were obtained using the image-guided system to assess the coefficient of variation, the within-subject standard deviation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A paired Student t test was used to assess statistical significance between the Verion and the auto-refracto-keratometer. A Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was obtained for all measurements, and the level of agreement was verified using Bland-Altman plots.
resultsThe right eyes of 73 patients were evaluated by each platform. The Verion coefficient of variation was 0.3% for the flat and steep keratometry, with the ICC being greater than 0.9 for all parameters measured. Paired t test showed statistically significant differences between groups (P = 0.0001). A good correlation was evidenced for keratometry values between platforms (r = 0.903, P = 0.0001 for K1, and r = 0.890, P = 0.0001). Bland-Altman plots showed a wide data spread for all variables.
conclusionThe image-guided system provided highly repeatable corneal power and keratometry measurements. However, significant differences were evidenced between the two platforms, and although values were highly correlated, they showed a wide data spread for all analysed variables; therefore, their interchangeable use for biometry assessment is not advisable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.