ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2020
Development and validation of a machine learning, smartphone-based tonometer.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2020. 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a New Handheld Automated Fixed-Force Applanation Tonometer.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Roadmap on advances in visual and physiological optics.Journal of optics (2010) · 2025Review
- Methods for Analytical Validation of Novel Digital Clinical Measures: Implementation Feasibility Evaluation Using Real-World Datasets.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The Role of Ophthalmology in Tele-Stroke Consults for Triaging Acute Vision Loss.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2024Article
- Non-contact tonometry: predicting intraocular pressure using a material-corneal thickness-independent methodology.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence in the anterior segment of eye diseases.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024Review
- Assessing Agreement and Variability Among Alternative Devices for Intraocular Pressure Measurement: A Comparative Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Chronic Kidney Disease as a Cardiovascular Disorder-Tonometry Data Analyses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Observational
- [Is home perimetry possible?]Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia · 2021Article
- Using Deep Learning to Automate Goldmann Applanation Tonometry Readings.Ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Model-to-Data Approach for Deep Learning in Optical Coherence Tomography Intraretinal Fluid Segmentation.JAMA ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Integration of smartphone technology and artificial intelligence for advanced ophthalmic care: A systematic review.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsTo compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a prototype smartphone tonometer with other tonometers used in clinical practice.
methodsPatients from an academic glaucoma practice were recruited. The smartphone tonometer uses fixed force applanation and in conjunction with a machine-learning computer algorithm is able to calculate the IOP. IOP was also measured using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in all subjects. A subset of patients were also measured using ICare, pneumotonometry (upright and supine positions) and Tono-Pen (upright and supine positions) and the results were compared.
results92 eyes of 81 subjects were successfully measured. The mean difference (in mm Hg) for IOP measurements of the smartphone tonometer versus other devices was +0.24 mm Hg for GAT, -1.39 mm Hg for ICare, -3.71 mm Hg for pneumotonometry and -1.30 mm Hg for Tono-Pen. The 95% limits of agreement for the smartphone tonometer versus other devices was -4.35 to 4.83 mm Hg for GAT, -6.48 to 3.70 mm Hg for ICare, -7.66 to -0.15 mm Hg for pneumotonometry and -5.72 to 3.12 mm Hg for Tono-Pen. Overall, the smartphone tonometer results correlated best with GAT (R
conclusionsPreliminary IOP measurements using a prototype smartphone-based tonometer was grossly equivalent to the reference standard.
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.