ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2020
Comparative Results of "Epi-Off" Conventional versus "Epi-Off" Accelerated Cross-Linking Procedure at 5-year Follow-Up.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of corneal pachymetry evolution after accelerated corneal crosslinking in keratoconus eyes using anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug imaging.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Accelerated Transepithelial Corneal Crosslinking in Non-Pediatric Patients with Progressive Keratoconus: Insights from a Retrospective Cohort Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Accelerated corneal cross-linking (18mW/cm2 for 5 min) with HPMC-riboflavin in progressive keratoconus - 5 years follow-up.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
- Reliability analysis of successive Corvis ST® measurements in keratoconus 2 years after accelerated corneal crosslinking compared to untreated keratoconus corneas.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- Keratoconus Diagnosis and Treatment: Recent Advances and Future Directions.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Review
- Commentary: Bunsen-Roscoe reciprocity - Is it still valid?Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- [Stage-appropriate treatment of keratoconus].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of our study was to compare the long-term efficacy and safety of "epi-off" conventional and "epi-off" accelerated corneal cross-linking (CXL) in patients with progressive keratoconus.
methods"Epithelial-off" ("Epi-off") CXL using the conventional technique (3 mW/cm
resultsIn both groups, Kflat presented similar results: decrease at 1 year (
conclusion"Epi-off" accelerated and conventional CXL have the same efficacy in terms of improvement in visual and topographic outcomes.
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.