Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35673350›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Comparison of Barrett Toric Calculations Using Measured and Predicted Posterior Corneal Astigmatism in Cataract Surgery Patients.

Mark K Lukewich, Fahmeeda Murtaza, Sohel Somani, Eric S Tam, Hannah H Chiu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Measured corneal astigmatism vs. predicted refractive astigmatism in determining astigmatism correction in cataract patients with low astigmatism.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Assessment of the refractive outcomes of patients with regular corneal astigmatism implanted with high-power toric intraocular lenses.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark K LukewichTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Fahmeeda MurtazaTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4342-6960
Sohel SomaniWilliam Osler Health System, Brampton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2547-3843
Eric S TamWilliam Osler Health System, Brampton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8476-3237
Hannah H ChiuWilliam Osler Health System, Brampton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2335-8008
University of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To compare residual astigmatism prediction errors across Barrett toric calculations using predicted posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) and PCA measured using the IOL Master 700 with total keratometry (IOLM). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was undertaken on patients with corneal astigmatism and no other ocular comorbidities that underwent uneventful refractive femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation between May 2019 and November 2019. Toric calculations were performed using the Barrett toric calculator and the following values: predicted PCA with anterior corneal measurements from Pentacam, IOLM standard keratometry (SK), OPD scan, and median measurements from these devices; predicted PCA with IOLM total keratometry (TK); and measured PCA with IOLM SK or IOLM TK. Residual astigmatism prediction error was calculated for each device and method of calculation at postoperative month 1 and 3 using the astigmatism double angle plot tool. Results: A total of 24 eyes, 10 with-the-rule (WTR), 10 against-the-rule (ATR) and 4 oblique astigmatism, from 24 patients were included in this study. PCA ranged from 0.00 to 0.67 D with a mean of 0.24 ± 0.15 D in all eyes. PCA was significantly greater in WTR eyes (0.32 D) compared to ATR eyes (0.16 D; p < 0.05). In ATR eyes, calculations made using IOLM SK and measured PCA had significantly lower total corneal astigmatism and toric IOL cylinder power compared to calculations made using Pentacam and IOLM TK (p < 0.05). No significant difference in mean absolute or centroid residual astigmatism prediction error was observed across devices or calculation methods. The percentage of eyes with absolute astigmatism prediction errors ≤0.5 D was not significantly different across groups. Conclusion: Barrett toric calculations using predicted PCA and PCA measured using IOLM produced comparable residual astigmatism prediction errors. The incorporation of median measurements did not significantly impact calculation accuracy.

Indexed as

astigmatism measurementBarrett toric calculatorfemtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgerytoric intraocular lens calculator

Identifiers

PMID35673350
PMCPMC9167600
OpenAlexW4282001067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.