ArticleEye (London, England)2023
Can ultrasonic biometric indices with optimal cut-offs be a potential screening tool for primary angle closure disease? A case-control study.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results of ocular biometry from a population-based study in detecting angle-closure disease in a clinical setting.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Comparison of anterior segment parameter measurements between Sirius Plus and Pentacam AXL.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDespite a significant disease burden and potential to cause blindness, primary angle closure disease (PACD) does not have a population-based screening programme. Biometric indices using ultrasound A-scan is a potential tool for glaucoma case-detection. Given that genetic and environmental factors influence these parameters and paucity of data on their discrimination thresholds in Indian populace, we conducted a matched case-control study to determine the biometric indices and their discrimination thresholds associated with PACD.
methodsWe studied 172 eyes of 86 participants (43 cases; 43 controls). We compared the following biometric parameters of cases (PACD, occludable angle ≥180° ± raised intraocular pressure) with age and gender-matched controls (1:1): Anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), axial length (AXL), lens position (LP), relative lens position (RLP), lens axial factor (LAF), simple crowding value (Cs), ACD/AXL). We performed conditional logistic regression (to identify factors associated with PACD) and Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis (to determine discrimination thresholds).
resultsReduced ACD (Adj OR 0.01; 95% CI: 0.0003-0.15, p < 0.001) and increased LT (Adj OR 10.3; 95% CI:2.42-43.93, p < 0.001) were associated with PACD. On ROC analysis, ACD, Cs, and ACD/AXL had optimum sensitivity/specificity at ≤3.015, ≥0.056 and ≤0.1303, respectively. ACD (88.4%) and Cs (94.2%) had highest sensitivity and specificity, respectively.
conclusionUltrasonic biometric parameters differed significantly between PACD and controls. ACD and Cs (at discrimination thresholds of ≤3.015 mm and ≥ 0.056, respectively) using ultrasound A-scan could be a potential tool for PACD case-detection that requires evaluation of its diagnostic yield and cost-effectiveness.
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.