ArticleBeyoglu eye journal2021
Comparison of Adult Refractive Disorder Measurements Using HandyRef-K, Retinomax, Plusoptix, and Table-top Autorefractometer Devices.
Article in Beyoglu eye journal, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of light barrier and type of refractive error on the performance of a portable wavefront aberrometer-based auto refractometer.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Reliability of handheld autorefractometers in patients after cataract surgery.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Validation of a simple-to-use, affordable, portable, wavefront aberrometry-based auto refractometer in the adult population: A prospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Percentile curves of refractive errors in a Spanish paediatric population.Journal of optometryObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study was conducted to compare refractive error measurements recorded using the Nidek HandyRef-K handheld autorefractometer (HDY; Nidek Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), Plusoptix A09 photorefractor (PO; Plusoptix GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany), Retinomax K-plus 3 (RTX; Right Mfg. Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), and a table-mounted autorefractometer/keratometer (TTR; URK 800, Unicos Co. Ltd., Daejeon, Republic of Korea).
methodsPatients aged ≥18 years underwent measurement of refraction without cycloplegia using 4 devices and the spherical power (SP), cylindrical power (CP), and spherical equivalent (SE) values were analyzed and compared.
resultsA total of 181 eyes of 181 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.08±0.95 years (range: 18-79 years). There was a significantly significant difference in the SP, CP, and SE values determined by the devices (p<0.001). The SP and SE values of the RTX and the HDY were similar, while the other device results were different (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p=0.004). The CP values of the PO and the TTR, the HDY and the TTR were also comparable.
conclusionThe HDY, RTX, and the PO are suitable for screening in clinical practice, but the findings strongly suggest that they should be used with caution.
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.