ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021
A practical continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis self-training system.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis proficiency via video analysis.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Transforming Surgical Training With AI Techniques for Training, Assessment, and Evaluation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Ridge operator-assisted delineation of capsulorhexis border for cataract surgery.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Commentary: High fidelity and cost-effective cataract surgery training system: Need of the hour.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe a practical, self-assembled continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC) self-training system to facilitate resident self-training and shorten the CCC learning curve.
methodsThis was a prospective experimental study that included a total of 600 capsulorhexis cases. A device for CCC practice was self-assembled and used for training and testing. Based on capsulorhexis manipulation experience, three main groups of residents (A, capsulorhexis experience with <50 cases; B, capsulorhexis experience with 400-500 cases; and C, capsulorhexis experience with >1000 cases) were created. Furthermore, based on different capsulorhexis conditions, each main group was divided into four subgroups (1, CCC without an anterior chamber cover and capsulorhexis marker; 2, CCC with an anterior chamber cover without a capsulorhexis marker; 3, CCC with an anterior chamber cover and a capsulorhexis marker; and 4, CCC with an anterior chamber cover and a capsulorhexis marker under 2.5 times magnification). Three CCC-related parameters, including acircularity index (AI), axis ratio (AR), and capsulorhexis time, were statistically evaluated.
resultsWe compared the differences in study parameters among 50 consecutively completed capsulorhexis cases by one trainee with different capsulorhexis experience in each subgroup. The CCC-related parameter values in subgroups 1 and 4 were significantly different among the three groups (P < 0.001). The capsulorhexis time in subgroup 2 was significantly different among the three groups (P < 0.001). The capsulorhexis time and AI in subgroup 3 were significantly different among the three groups (P < 0.001). Moreover, with increasing manipulation experience (from group A-C), the capsulorhexis time, the AI, and AR tended to decrease. With the help of the CCC marker, in subgroups 3 and 4, the AI and AR were closer to 1.0.
conclusionThis self-assembled CCC self-training system is practical. The CCC marker seems helpful for size specification and centration during self-training.
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.