ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Measurement of ocular counter-roll using iris images during binocular fixation and head tilt.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Otolithic Function in Patients with Unilateral Ménière's Disease Using Video Ocular Counter-Roll Test.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025Article
- 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
objectiveTo compare the ocular counter-roll (OCR) measured using iris images during binocular fixation and head tilt with OCR measured via fundus photography.
methodsFifty-three healthy college students participated in this study. The mean OCR was measured by collection of iris images and fundus images under seven head tilt conditions (0 degrees; 10, 20, and 30 degrees right; and 10, 20, and 30 degrees left). Three iris images (crossed pupil center, pupil center, and pupil periphery) were taken using a slit-lamp biomicroscope with an ophthalmic camera and a half-silvered mirror; fundus images were collected via fundus photography. The mean OCR values were compared between images taken with each method.
resultsNo iris images or head tilt conditions revealed any significant differences in mean OCR comparison with fundus images. The mean difference in OCR was smallest, and the correlation was greatest, between the crossed pupil center and fundus images.
conclusionA half-silvered mirror and iris images can replace fundus photography for the measurement of OCR.
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.