Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33419003›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography.

Katharina Breher, Alejandro Calabuig, Laura Kühlewein, Focke Ziemssen, Arne Ohlendorf, Siegfried Wahl

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katharina BreherInstitute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9066-3745
Alejandro CalabuigInstitute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9490-8305
Laura KühleweinInstitute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1906-8681
Focke ZiemssenCenter for Ophthalmology, University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3873-0581
Arne OhlendorfCarl Zeiss Vision International GmbH, 73430 Aalen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6373-1420
Siegfried WahlInstitute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3437-6711
University of Tübingen · DECarl Zeiss (Germany) · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft ZUK63, Open-Access-Publishing Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retinal shape presents a clinical parameter of interest for myopia, and has commonly been inferred indirectly from peripheral refraction (PRX) profiles. Distortion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans offer a new and direct possibility for retinal shape estimation. The current study compared retinal curvatures derived from OCT scans vs. PRX measurements in three refractive profiles (0° and 90° meridians, plus spherical equivalent) for 25 participants via Bland-Altman analysis. The radial differences between both procedures were correlated to axial length using Pearson correlation. In general, PRX- and OCT-based retinal radii showed low correlation (all intraclass correlation coefficients < 0.21). PRX found flatter retinal curvatures compared to OCT, with the highest absolute agreement found with the 90° meridian (mean difference +0.08 mm) and lowest in the 0° meridian (mean difference +0.89 mm). Moreover, a negative relation between axial length and the agreement of both methods was detected especially in the 90° meridian (R = -0.38,

Indexed as

myopiaperipheral refractionretinal shape

Identifiers

PMID33419003
PMCPMC7825350
OpenAlexW3120284901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.