ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2021
Agreement between subjective and predicted high and low contrast visual acuities with a double-pass system.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of changes in objective visual quality based on tear film stability after SMILE surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Pitfalls of Using NIR-Based Clinical Instruments to Test Eyes Implanted with Diffractive Intraocular Lenses.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison Between an Intraocular Lens With Extended Depth of Focus (Tecnis Symfony ZXR00) and a New Monofocal Intraocular Lens With Enhanced Intermediate Vision (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00).Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the agreement between subjective high and low contrast visual acuity (VA) and predicted values from double-pass system measurements in healthy candidates to laser refractive surgery.
methodsNinety-two eyes measured during the preoperative screening to laser refractive surgery were included in this retrospective analysis. High contrast subjective visual acuity (HCVA) and low contrasts at 20% (LCVA20) and 9% (LCVA9) were compared with the predicted VA obtained with a commercial double-pass system (OQAS) at the same levels of contrast, 100% (OV100), 20% (OV20), and 9% (OV9). The agreement was evaluated with Bland-Altman analysis computing the limits of agreement (LoAs) and the correlations with the spearman rho.
resultsAn underestimation of VA was obtained with the double-pass system for the highest contrast. Differences between predictive and subjective measurements were statistically significant for 100% contrast (- 0.08 logMAR, p < 0.0005), but not for 20% (- 0.03 logMAR, p = 0.07) and 9% (- 0.02 logMAR, p = 0.9) of contrasts. The LoAs increased with the decrease of contrast from 0.29 with 100% to 0.39 logMAR with 9% of contrast. A weak correlation was obtained between subjective and predicted VA (rho ≤ 0.33) that was only significant for 100% (p = 0.001) and 20% (p = 0.004) contrasts.
conclusionMean differences between methods were reasonably small so mean results obtained for predicted VA in OQAS studies can be considered as reliable, at least in healthy subjects and for low contrast. However, limits of agreement were considerably poor which means that OQAS cannot replace individual subjective measurements of VA in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33128671What 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.