ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Does the Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Estimates Depend on the Measurement Principle of Autorefractors?
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Reliability and Acceptability of RDx-Based Tele-Controlled Subjective Refraction Compared with Traditional Subjective Refraction.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Trial
- Longitudinal refractive changes following orbital decompression in thyroid eye disease: dominant role of axial configuration and globe position with contributions from surgical technique and corneal biomechanics.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2026Article
- The QuickSee autorefractor reliably measures the accommodative response in children compared with the Shin-Nippon autorefractor.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Article
- Comparative Validation of MOPTIM MRT-200 Refraction Device with 2WIN and Retinomax.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Retinoscopes: Past and present.World journal of methodology · 2024Article
- The effect of cycloplegia in the accuracy of autorefraction, keratometry and axial length using the Myopia Master.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Peripheral Refraction Using Ancillary Retinoscope Component (P-ARC).Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Test-Retest of the Spot Vision Screener among Children with Ophthalmological Diseases including Strabismus.Journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Effects of Insufficient Sleep on Myopia in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nature and science of sleep · 2024Review
- Validation of a simple-to-use, affordable, portable, wavefront aberrometry-based auto refractometer in the adult population: A prospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Identification of ocular refraction based on deep learning algorithm as a novel retinoscopy method.Biomedical engineering online · 2022Article
- Effect of six different autorefractor designs on the precision and accuracy of refractive error measurement.PloS one · 2022Article
- Validation of a Simple-to-Use, Affordable, Portable Wavefront Aberrometry-Based Auto Refractometer in a Paediatric Population.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- The change of myopic prevalence in children and adolescents before and after COVID-19 pandemic in Suqian, China.PloS one · 2022Article
- Ellipsoid Spectacle Comparison of Plusoptix, Retinomax and 2WIN Autorefractors.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Instrument-based, non-cycloplegic versus cycloplegic refraction in pediatric and young adult populations (≤25 years): A systematic review and meta-analysis.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and repeatability of refractive errors obtained using three autorefractors based on different measurement principles, vis-à-vis, gold-standard retinoscopy. Methodology: Accuracy of noncycloplegic, sphero-cylindrical refractive error of 234 eyes was obtained using the rotary prism-based RM-8900 closed-field autorefractor, photorefraction based Spot vision screener, wavefront aberrometry based E-see, and streak retinoscopy by four different examiners, masked to the results of each other. Intersession repeatability of autorefractors was determined by repeat measurements in a subset of 40 subjects. Results: Retinoscopy values of M, J Conclusions: Refractive errors measured using autorefractors operating on different principles show minimal bias and good short-term repeatability but relatively large agreement limits, vis-à-vis, retinoscopy. Among them, the wavefront aberrometry based E-see autorefractor performs relatively better in all measurement parameters evaluated here. Translational Relevance: Although autorefractor estimates of noncycloplegic refractive error appears independent of their measurement principle, their relatively poor agreement with gold-standard retinoscopy warrants caution while used for screening and quantification of refractive errors.
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.