ArticlePloS one2022
Evaluation of angle-to-angle and spur-to-spur using swept source optical coherence tomography in different refractive error.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of Angle-Angle Diameter Relationship with Corneal Diameter, Axial Length, and Intraocular Pressure in Pediatric Glaucoma.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Mean human corneal diameter and palpebral fissure lengths as scales for forensic analysis of photographed faces: an analytical review.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- From ciliary sulcus asymmetry to vault prediction: an hSTS-based approach to individualized sizing of implantable collamer lenses in myopic eyes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Validation of the Screening Corneal Objective Risk of Ectasia Analyzer Evaluated by Swept Source Optical Coherence Tomography for Keratoconus in an Asian Population.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo measure angle-to-angle (ATA) and spur-to-spur (STS) distances along six meridians using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) and compare with horizontal white-to-white (WTW) distance in different refractive error.
methodsOverall, 126 eyes were assessed with the Anterion SS-OCT (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany). ATA and STS distances were obtained using SS-OCT at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 degrees. WTW was measured at 0 degree with built-in infrared camera. One way ANOVA test, pearson correlation coefficient, and stepwise multivariate regression analysis were used to compare ATA and STS distances with age, anterior chamber depth (ACD), axial length (AL), and simulated keratometric values (Sim K) in different refractive error groups.
resultsThe mean MRSE refraction was +0.05 ± 0.23 D in the emmetropic group (41 eyes), -3.42 ± 3.04 D in the myopic group (44 eyes), and +1.33 ± 0.64 D in the hyperopic group (31 eyes). There was no statistical difference in the WTW of the emmetropic (11.62 ± 0.44 mm), myopic (11.79 ± 0.46 mm), and hyperopic groups (11.80 ± 0.49 mm) using one-way ANOVA (p = 0.007). ATA and STS were vertically oval in all groups. The correlation between ATA, STS and age, ACD, AL, and K values showed different significance for each meridian according to the refractive error. ATA increased as the horizontal WTW, ACD, and AL increased and Sim K decreased. STS shows relatively smaller explanatory power than ATA in the stepwise multivariate regression analysis.
conclusionsThis study is the first to analyze the relationship between ATA and STS compared to WTW by different refractive error. The difference between the horizontally oval WTW and vertically oval anterior chamber can be large, especially in myopia. ATA showed a greater positive correlation than STS with AL and ACD.
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.