Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37019974›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

The intra- and inter-day repeatability of corneal densitometry measurements in subjects with keratoconus and in healthy controls.

Ingemar Gustafsson, Dimitrios Bizios, Anders Ivarsen, Jesper Ø Hjortdal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ingemar GustafssonDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Ophthalmology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. ingemar.gustafsson@med.lu.se.
Dimitrios BiziosDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Ophthalmology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Anders IvarsenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jesper Ø HjortdalDepartment of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKLund University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The healthy cornea is transparent, however, disease can affect its structure, rendering it more or less opaque. The ability to assess the clarity of the cornea objectively could thus be of considerable interest for keratoconus patients. It has previously been suggested that densitometry can be used to diagnose early keratoconus, and that the values of densitometry variables increase with increasing disease severity, indicating that densitometry could also be used to assess progressive keratoconus. Previous studies have only assessed the repeatability of corneal densitometry measurements on the same day, which does not reflect the clinical setting in which changes are evaluated over time. We have therefore evaluated the inter-day repeatability of densitometry measurements in both patients with keratoconus and healthy controls. Measurements in the middle layer of the 2-6 mm zone of the cornea showed the best repeatability. Although an objective measure of the corneal transparency could be interesting, the generally poor repeatability of densitometry measurements limits their use. The repeatability of corneal clarity measurements could be improved by using other approaches such as optical coherence tomography, but this remains to be investigated. Such improvements would allow the more widespread use of corneal densitometry in clinical practice.

Indexed as

KeratoconusCorneaCorneal TopographyDensitometryHumansReproducibility of ResultsVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID37019974
PMCPMC10076276
OpenAlexW4362608896

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.