ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2018
Comparison among Ocular Response Analyzer, Corvis ST and Goldmann applanation tonometry in healthy children.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometer, corvis ST and a conventional non-contact airpuff tonometer in eyes with previous myopic refractive surgery and correlation with corneal biomechanical parameters.International ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Age-related analysis of corneal biomechanical parameters in healthy Chinese individuals.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Corneal biomechanics in early diagnosis of keratoconus using artificial intelligence.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Review
- Keratoconus: imaging modalities and management.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2024Review
- Observation seasonal variation of intraocular pressure in young healthy volunteers.International journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Age-Related Changes in Corneal Epithelial Thickness Measured with an Ultrasound Pachymeter.Clinical interventions in aging · 2022Article
- Common causes of visual impairment in the elderly.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2021Review
- A review of imaging modalities for detecting early keratoconus.Eye (London, England) · 2021Review
- Advances in Biomechanical Parameters for Screening of Refractive Surgery Candidates: A Review of the Literature, Part III.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2019Review
- Prevalence of Visual Impairment in School Children.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
- Author's Reply.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore the relationship between different parameters of Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) and Corvis ST (CST) in a sample of healthy Iranian school-aged children and the relationship between parameters of these 2 instruments against intraocular pressure (IOP), measured by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT-IOP), age and gender, and find possible correlation between ORA and CST with GAT.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 90 healthy children. A general interview and complete eye examination were performed. Following successful GAT-IOP measurement, ORA and CST were conducted. The CST parameters were A 1/2 length (A1L, A2L), A 1/2 velocity (A1V, A2V), highest concavity deformation amplitude (HCDA), radius of curvature (RoC), peak distance (PD), central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP. The ORA parameters were corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOP-G) and corneal compensated IOP (IOP-CC). Extracted data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science software.
resultsTotally 39 males with age of 9.08±1.60 (6-12)y and 51 females with age of 8.96±1.55 (6-13)y were included. Many CST parameters were significantly correlated with CH, CRF, IOP-G and IOP-CC. Some CST parameters had a significant correlation with GAT-IOP, including IOP-CST in both eyes and HCDA, A2L, PD, and RoC in the left eye, but none with age, except A2L in the right eye. The CRF measurement showed a significant correlation with GAT-IOP in both eyes and CH in the right eye, yet, none with age. Among all CST and ORA parameters, CCT-CST in both eyes and A1L in right eye had a significant correlation with gender, although this was a negligible negative correlation. Comparison of mean IOP values by different devices showed a significantly highest IOP overestimation by CST and lowest by IOP-CC compared with GAT. Also, IOP-G versus IOP-CST significantly had the lowest IOP overestimation among others. Overall, either low positive correlation or negligible correlation was found between IOP measurements by 3 instruments.
conclusionThe study finds the highest IOP overestimation by CST and lowest by IOP-CC compared with GAT. Overall, either low positive correlation or negligible correlation is found between IOP measurements by the 3 instruments.
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.