ArticleScientific reports2020
A model of visual limitation in patients with keratoconus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Future of Interventional Keratoconus Management: Perspectives on Integrating Epithelium-on Oxygen-Enriched Cross-Linking into Comprehensive Care Pathways.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Article
- Visual rehabilitation using rigid gas permeable contact lenses after femtosecond laser-assisted minimally invasive lamellar keratoplasty in patients with keratoconus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A novel tool for quantitative measurement of distortion in keratoconus.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- CommonJournal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims to calculate a relevance model of visual limitation (V.L.) in keratoconus patients based on refractive and topographic parameters. A cross-sectional study was carried out in Torrecárdenas Hospital, Almería, Spain, between February 2018 and July 2019. It included 250 keratoconus patients. Two groups were created according to a grading system of V.L. based on RETICS (Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Salud) classification: keratoconus patients with no V.L. (best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) ≤ 0.05 logMAR) and keratoconus patients with V.L. (BSCVA > 0.05 logMAR). Correlations and a binary logistic regression were established. V.L. was correlated with maximum curvature (r = 0.649, p < 0.001) and root mean square higher-order aberrations (HOARMS) (r = 0.625, p < 0.001). Binary logistic regression included V.L. as the dependent variable and spherical equivalent, HOARMS, spherical aberration and interaction between the anterior and posterior vertical coma as independent variables. The model was a good fit. Area under the curve (A.U.C.) of receiver operating characteristic (R.O.C.) curve was 0.924, sensitivity 91.90%, specificity 83.60%, accuracy 88.94%; and precision 91.17%. Binary logistic regression model of V.L. is a good fit model to predict the early loss of visual acuity in keratoconus patients.
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.