Trial reportAmerican journal of ophthalmology2018
Intraocular Pressure Measurement Accuracy and Repeatability of a Modified Goldmann Prism: Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in American journal of ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modified Goldmann prism intraocular pressure measurement accuracy and correlation to corneal biomechanical metrics: multicentre randomised clinical trial.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2019Trial
- Intraocular Pressure Accuracy Post-Myopic Laser in situ Keratomileusis: Pivotal Study Results, Standard vs Correcting Applanation Tonometry Surface Goldmann Tonometry.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Directional drift in biologically meaningful vector planes: A proposed geometric framework for early detection of subthreshold disease.PloS one · 2026Article
- Intraocular pressure correlation to progressive retinal nerve fiber layer loss in primary open angle glaucoma as measured by standard and modified goldmann applanation tonometers.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of agreement of IOP measurements by Tono-Vera tonometer to Goldmann applanation tonometry.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Goldmann and modified Goldmann tonometry measuring intraocular pressure changes in eyes which underwent myopic laser in situ Keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Comparison of Three Tonometers in Measuring Intraocular Pressure in Eyes That Underwent Myopic Laser in situ Keratomileusis and Photorefractive Keratectomy.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Central Corneal Thickness Among Filipino Patients in an Ambulatory Eye Surgery Center Using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- New applanation tonometer for myopic patients after laser refractive surgery.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Improved Efficacy of Topical Latanoprost 0.005% Demonstrated by Corneal Biomechanical Correcting Modified Goldmann Prism.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo clinically evaluate a modified surface Goldmann applanation tomometer (GAT) prism for intraocular pressure (IOP) accuracy, repeatability, and safety.
designProspective, open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter reference device reliability and validity analysis.
methodsA GAT and a modified surface GAT prism measured IOP on 173 unique eyes. The study design and analysis complied with FDA 510(k) and ANSIZ80.10-2014 guidelines. All eyes were randomized to IOP measurement by 1 of 5 standard prisms or 5 modified prisms, each from a different manufacturing lot. Pressures were measured by 6 investigators, 2 times with each prism, for a total of 1384 IOP measurements. Analysis included Bland-Altman difference accuracy, intraoperator and interoperator IOP measurement, and manufactured lot repeatability.
resultsBland-Altman indicated no IOP measurements pairs outside the ±5 mm Hg guidelines. Operator and manufactured lot repeatability F tests and 1-way ANOVAs indicated no statistical difference between the standard and modified prisms (all P > .10). The difference in IOP measurements of the standard and modified prisms correlated well to Dresdner central corneal thickness (CCT) correction (P = .01).
conclusionA modified surface replacement prism is statistically equivalent to a flat-surfaced prism. The modified surface prism indicated statistically significant correction for CCT requiring further testing outside the ANSI standard limits (0.500 mm < CCT < 0.600 mm) to examine its full potential.
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.