ReviewMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2019
Advances in Biomechanical Parameters for Screening of Refractive Surgery Candidates: A Review of the Literature, Part III.
Review in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incremental contribution of Corvis ST dynamic biomechanical parameters to interpretable machine learning prediction of clinician-selected refractive procedures: a retrospective observational study.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Observational
- 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
- Establishing Standardization Guidelines For Finite-Element Optomechanical Simulations of Refractive Laser Surgeries: An Application to Photorefractive Keratectomy.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Detection ability of corneal biomechanical parameters for early diagnosis of ectasia.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Machine learning analysis with the comprehensive index of corneal tomographic and biomechanical parameters in detecting pediatric subclinical keratoconus.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- In Vivo Evaluation of the Effects of SMILE with Different Amounts of Stromal Ablation on Corneal Biomechanics by Optical Coherence Elastography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Changes in Stress-Strain Index and Corneal Biomechanics in Granular Corneal Dystrophy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Relationship between corneal biomechanical parameters and corneal sublayer thickness measured by Corvis ST and UHR-OCT in keratoconus and normal eyes.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2021Article
- The Effect of Axial Length Elongation on Corneal Biomechanical Property.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- The Role of Corneal Biomechanics in the Assessment of Ectasia Susceptibility Before Laser Vision Correction.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Deep Learning Algorithm for Keratoconus Detection from Tomographic Maps and Corneal Biomechanics: A Diagnostic Study.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Corneal biomechanical properties have garnered significant interest in their relation to the development of ectatic corneal disease. Alongside the advent of corneal tomography and Scheimpflug imaging such as Pentacam and Galilei, there have been advances in assessing the cornea based on its biomechanical characteristics. Though the aforementioned imaging systems are highly capable of identifying morphologic abnormalities, they cannot assess mechanical stability of the cornea. This article, in contrast to Parts I and II of this article series, will focus on in vivo corneal biomechanical imaging systems. The two most readily available commercial systems include the Corvis ST and the Ocular Response Analyzer. Both of these systems aimed to characterize corneal biomechanics via distinct measurements. While in Parts I and II of this article series the authors focused on elevation, pachymetric, and keratometric data, the purpose of this article was to summarize biomechanical parameters and their clinical use in screening refractive surgery candidates. Moreover, this article explores biomechanical decompensation and its role in the development of corneal ectasia and keratoconus. There is a focus on the diagnostic accuracy of biomechanical indices in the identification of diseases such as keratoconus that may preclude a patient from undergoing refractive surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31598522PMC6778467W2987543156What 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.