ArticleDie Ophthalmologie2023
[Corneal endothelial cell photography: comparison of smartphones].
Article in Die Ophthalmologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Porcine Nose Atrophy Assessed by Automatic Imaging and Detection ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe documentation of ophthalmologic findings using smartphone photography can confirm diagnoses and enable follow-up assessments in outpatient care. Photographing corneal endothelial cells using a smartphone on a slit lamp is complex for both smartphone and examiner. Smartphone models differ in their ability to quickly and safely take images of the corneal endothelium. AIM OF THIS WORK: In this paper different smartphone models are presented with respect to their applicability for corneal endothelial cell photography and success factors for good smartphone imaging are described. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn a cross-sectional study, a selection of 16 different smartphone models were compared with respect to their use in corneal endothelial cell photography. The smartphones were attached to the slit lamp eyepiece using an adjustable adapter. It was tested whether high-quality endothelial cell images of healthy subjects could be obtained within 3 min using the standard photo app of the respective smartphone. In addition, the subjective difficulty of creating the image was recorded. Factors contributing to successful imaging of corneal endothelial cells were summarized in a figure. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Distinct differences regarding feasibility and quality of endothelial cell photography were detected between the different smartphones. Not every smartphone is suitable for endothelial cell photography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36301370What 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.