Trial reportPloS one2020
Association between keratoconus disease severity and repeatability in measurements of parameters for the assessment of progressive disease.
Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transepithelial Versus Epithelium-Off Corneal Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus: Findings From a Cochrane Systematic Review.American journal of ophthalmology · 2021Pooled it
- A randomised controlled trial on cross-linking protocols for the treatment of progressive keratoconus using isoosmolar and hypoosmolar riboflavin with the addition of sterile water in thin corneae.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Trial
- Early findings in a randomised controlled trial on crosslinking protocols using isoosmolar and hypoosmolar riboflavin for the treatment of progressive keratoconus.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Trial
- Early findings in a prospective randomised study on three cross-linking treatment protocols: interruption of the iontophoresis treatment protocol.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2023Trial
- Multivariate Analysis of the Spatial Distance Between the Corneal Thinnest Point and Maximum Keratometry in Keratoconic Corneas: Association with Disease Severity.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prediction of Maximum Keratometry Progression With Stratified Progression Criteria in Keratoconus Patients Using Machine Learning.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Changes in tomographic parameters across different wearing and cessation periods of apical clearance-fitted rigid gas-permeable contact lenses in keratoconus.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Refractive Surprises After Cataract Surgery: Identification and Management in Optometric Practice- A Comprehensive Review.Clinical optometry · 2026Review
- Challenges in Biometry and Intraocular Lens Power Calculations in Keratoconus: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Diurnal Variations in Anterior Segment Parameters in Different Grades of Patients With Keratoconus.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Extremely asymmetric ectasia: Tomographically unilateral keratoconus.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- Repeatability of Pentacam HR in Keratoconus According to Two Different Scan Protocols: 25-3D Scan and 50-Cornea Fine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Repeatability and agreement of two ocular biometers with single and dual Scheimpflug cameras in keratoconus eyes.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
- Comparison of a Scheimpflug imaging with other screening indices in diagnosing keratoconus and keratoconus suspect.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The HUC progression score: A new method for determining KERATOCONUS progression.European journal of ophthalmology · 2024Observational
- Comparison of corneal measurements in keratoconus eyes with two swept-source-optical coherence tomography devices and a Scheimpflug device.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
- Assessing progression limits in different grades of keratoconus from a novel perspective: precision of measurements of the corneal epithelium.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2024Article
- Repeatability of Scheimpflug based corneal tomography parameters in advanced keratoconus with thin corneas.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Influence of Keratoconus Severity on Detecting True Progression with Scheimpflug Imaging and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Patient experience and repeatability of measurements made with the Pentacam HR in patients with keratoconus.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgressive keratoconus can lead to severely impaired vision, but there is currently no consensus on the definition of progressive disease. Errors in the measurement of the parameters commonly used to establish progressive disease were evaluated in an attempt to determine the limits at which a true change in the values can be detected. The possible association between measurement error and disease severity was also investigated to evaluate the need for limits based on disease severity.
methodsSixty-one eyes were studied in 61 patients with keratoconus. Four replicate measurements were made in each patient using a Scheimpflug-based tomographic system (denoted the PC) and an auto-keratometer (denoted the AK). The repeatability coefficient, i.e., the level below which differences between two measurements are found in 95% of paired observations, was calculated. Patients were further divided into three groups based on disease severity (parameter magnitude).
resultsIncreasing magnitude of all the keratometric parameters investigated was significantly associated with increasing measurement errors, and thus worse repeatability. The maximum keratometry value (Kmax) was the least repeatable parameter (1.23 D, 95% CI 1.11-1.35 D) and showed the strongest association between parameter magnitude and measurement error. The repeatability coefficient ranged between 0.32 and 1.62 D, depending on disease severity. The most repeatable parameter was the flattest central keratometry value (K1), measured with the PC (0.51 D, 95% CI 0.46-0.56 D) and the AK (0.54 D, 95% CI 0.48-0.59 D). K1 showed the weakest association between parameter magnitude and measurement error. The repeatability coefficient for K1 ranged between 0.40 and 0.54 D when using the PC, and between 0.34 and 0.70 D when using the AK in the three groups.
conclusionsThe association between the magnitude of the keratometric parameters and their measurement errors suggests that limits should be based on disease severity to ensure reliable detection of progressive keratoconus. Further studies are, however, required.
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.