Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36660111›Full record

ReviewTaiwan journal of ophthalmology

Non-optical coherence tomography modalities for assessment of angle closure.

Natalia Porporato, Katharina C Bell, Shamira A Perera, Tin Aung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

4 authors.

Natalia PorporatoSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore.
Katharina C BellSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore.
Shamira A PereraSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore.
Tin AungSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary angle closure glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness, particularly in Asia. Its pathophysiology is based in the closure of the anterior chamber angle (ACA). In addition to gonioscopy (current reference standard), in the past decade, anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) has been incorporated in routine ophthalmic practice to help assess the configuration of the ACA. Especially in nonspecialist ophthalmology practice, gonioscopy may be less frequently performed and AS-OCT may not be available, leading to the need of other anterior segment evaluation methods. Evaluating the anterior chamber depth (ACD) has long been recognized as screening tool for primary angle-closure glaucoma. It can be measured with several devices, such as Scheimpflug photography and the scanning peripheral ACD analyzer. It can also be estimated with the oblique flashlight test and van Herick technique (limbal ACD assessment). More recently, goniophotographic systems have been developed to produce images of the ACA similar to those seen with manual gonioscopy. NGS-1 automated gonioscope (NIDEK Co, Gamagori, Japan) and the RetCam (Natus Medical Incorporated, Pleasanton, CA) are commercially available. However, NGS-1 is the only one with a specialized software for ACA imaging. Several prototype devices are currently being developed, such as the GonioPEN and axicon lens assisted gonioscopy. This article aims to review different modalities of ACA assessment, beyond AS-OCT, and compare their relative advantages and disadvantages.

Indexed as

Angle closure glaucomaanterior chamber depthimagingoptical coherence tomographyscreening

Identifiers

PMID36660111
PMCPMC9843576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.