Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36203753›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Determining the center of a keratoconus: Comparison of different tomographic parameters and impact of disease severity.

Gernot Steinwender, Alexander Kollenc, Mehdi Shajari, Michael Sommer, Andrea Borenich, Jutta Horwath-Winter, Ewald Lindner, Nora Woltsche, Wolfgang List, Andreas Wedrich

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gernot SteinwenderDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Alexander KollencDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Mehdi ShajariDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Michael SommerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Andrea BorenichInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Jutta Horwath-WinterDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Ewald LindnerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Nora WoltscheDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Wolfgang ListDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Andreas WedrichDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Medical University of Graz · ATUniversity Hospital Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: There exists remarkable variation in definitions for the location of the center of a keratoconus. The objective of this study was to analyze deviations between locations obtained by different tomographic maps for that purpose. Furthermore, it was investigated whether these deviations are influenced by disease severity. Methods: In 162 eyes with keratoconus, corneal tomographic maps derived by Scheimpflug technology were retrospectively analyzed to determine the cone location with 5 different methods: maximum axial curvature of the front surface (Kmax), maximum tangential curvature of the front surface (tKmax), minimum pachymetry (Pachymin), maximum elevation of the front surface (ELEF), and maximum elevation of the back surface (ELEB). Distances between the locations were calculated and tested for a correlation with keratoconus severity and distance between cone and corneal vertex. Results: Cone locations derived from the curvature maps (Kmax, tKmax) showed the lowest agreement with the locations determined by pachymetry or elevation maps. The largest distances were found between Kmax and Pachymin [Median and Interquartile range: 1.19 mm (0.87, 1.60)], Kmax and ELEB [1.12 mm (0.79, 1.41)], and Kmax and ELEF [0.97 mm (0.64, 1.27)]. Low distances (<0.5 mm) were calculated between ELEB and ELEF, and ELEB and Pachymin. All of the calculated distances between the locations showed a significant negative correlation with keratoconus severity and most of them increased significantly with a more peripheral position of the cone ( Conclusions: There was low consistency between different methods for describing the location of a keratoconus. Curvature-based determinations of the cone center (Kmax, tKmax) showed the highest deviations and should not be used for that purpose. However, the discrepancies between different cone location methods diminished with increasing disease severity and more central position of the cone.

Indexed as

corneacorneal tomographycustomized cross-linkingectasiakeratoconus

Identifiers

PMID36203753
PMCPMC9530702
OpenAlexW4297922498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.