ArticleEye and vision (London, England)2020
Tomography-based definition of keratoconus for Down syndrome patients.
Article in Eye and vision (London, England), 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.
- Scheimpflug Tomographic Indices for Classifying Normal, Down Syndrome and Clinical Keratoconus in Pediatric Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Systemic Associations with Keratoconus.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Underlying Relationship between Keratoconus and Down Syndrome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Anterior pituitary, sex hormones, and keratoconus: Beyond traditional targets.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2022Article
- Corneal characteristics in Down syndrome patients with normal and keratoconic cornea.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Corneal biomechanical changes in allergic conjunctivitis.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2021Article
- Down syndrome: a review of ocular manifestations.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the diagnostic ability of Pentacam HR (Oculus Optikgeräte, GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany) tomographic indices in discriminating keratoconus (KC) and KC suspect (KCS) in 10- to 30-year-old patients with Down syndrome (DS).
methodsIn this study, DS patients were enrolled through special needs schools, the National Down Syndrome Society, and relevant non-profit organizations. Diagnoses were made independently by two experienced specialists. Forty Pentacam indices related to corneal thickness, volume, density, keratometry, power, shape, aberration, and elevation were extracted. For each index, the accuracy for KC and KCS diagnosis was evaluated using discriminant analysis and the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). From each enrolled case, data from only one eye was entered in the analyses.
resultsAnalyses were performed on data from 25 KC, 46 KCS, and 154 non-ectatic DS eyes. The best discriminants for KC were anterior higher order aberrations (HOA) (cutoff > 0.643, AUROC = 0.879), posterior vertical coma (cutoff > 0.0702 μm, AUROC = 0.875), anterior vertical coma (cutoff > 0.4124 μm, AUROC = 0.868), and total HOA (cutoff > 0.608, AUROC = 0.867). The difference between AUROCs were not statistically significant (all
conclusionsIn this sample of DS patients, best KC discriminators were HOA and coma which showed good diagnostic ability. For KCS, best predictors were minimum corneal thickness, corneal volume, and BAD-D with relatively good diagnostic ability. Defining a new set of KC diagnostic criteria for DS patients is suggested.
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.