ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Scheimpflug vs Scanning-Slit Corneal Tomography: Comparison of Corneal and Anterior Chamber Tomography Indices for Repeatability and Agreement in Healthy Eyes.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. 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.
- Comparative analysis of pupillometry in two scheimpflug-based measurement systems.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Advances in Corneal Diagnostics Using Machine Learning.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Topographic Keratoconus Incidence in Greece Diagnosed in Routine Consecutive Cataract Procedures: A Consecutive Case Series of 1250 Cases over 5 Years.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A comparison of Scansys and Sirius tomography in healthy eyes.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparison of Scheimpflug tomography, Placido disc, and combined Placido Scheimpflug in the measurement of pupil offset in myopic population.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Repeatability and Agreement of Chord Mu between Scheimpflug Tomography and Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2023Article
- Automated cornea diagnosis using deep convolutional neural networks based on cornea topography maps.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Repeatability of pupil diameter measurements using three different topography devices.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Anterior Ocular Biometrics Using Placido-scanning-slit System, Rotating Scheimpflug Tomography, and Swept-source Optical Coherence Tomography.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate and compare the repeatability and agreement of Scheimpflug vs scanning-slit tomography of the cornea and the anterior chamber in terms of keratometric and tomographic indices in healthy eyes.
methodsThe 20 eyes of 10 healthy participants underwent 3 consecutive measurements using both Scheimpflug-tomography and scanning-slit tomography, diagnostic devices. Multiple corneal and anterior chamber tomographic parameters were recorded and evaluated to include corneal keratometry and its axis; corneal best-fit sphere (BFS), pachymetry mapping, angle kappa, anterior chamber depth (ACD), pupil diameter, and location. Repeatability for each device was assessed using the within each subject standard deviation of sequential exams, the coefficient variation (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement between the two devices was assessed using Bland-Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and correlation coefficient (r).
resultsBoth devices were found to have high repeatability (ICC>0.9) both in keratometric and other tomographic measurements. Scheimpflug tomography's repeatability though appeared superior in the average keratometry values, anterior and posterior BFS, thinnest corneal pachymetry value and location (p<0.05). Agreement: Statistically significant inter-device differences were noted in the mean values of K1, K2, BFS, ACD and thinnest corneal pachymetry (p<0.05). Despite the agreement differences noted, the two devices were well correlated (r>0.8) in respective measurements with Scheimpflug delivering consistently lower values than the scanning-slit tomography device.
conclusionScheimpflug-tomography repeatability was found to be superior to that of scanning-slit tomography in this specific study, in most parameters evaluated. Inter-device agreement evaluation suggests that reading from the two devices may not be used interchangeably in absolute values, yet they are well correlated with Scheimpflug delivering consistently lower values in most.
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.