ArticlePloS one2023
Comparison of the efficacy and invasiveness of manual and automated gonioscopy.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Clinical Evaluation of an Anterior Chamber Angle-Based Lens Sizing Method for Implantable Collamer Lens Surgery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Assessment of Peripheral Anterior Synechiae Using Linear Gonio-Images Following Trabeculotomy with Trabectome.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Insertion Depth of the iStent Inject W and Its Association with Surgical Outcomes Using Automated Gonioscopy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical application of anterior segment optical coherence tomography in ocular emergencies: A comprehensive review.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Review
- Developing and validating an explainable clinlabomics-based machine-learning model for screening primary angle-closure glaucoma in the context of PPPM.The EPMA journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of angle-closure detection between automated gonioscopy and anterior-segment optical coherence tomography.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy and invasiveness of manual gonioscopy and automated 360-degree gonioscopy.
methodManual and automated gonioscopy were performed on 70 patients with glaucoma. Manual gonioscopy was performed by a glaucoma specialist and an ophthalmology resident, and automated gonioscopy (GS-1) was performed by orthoptists. We compared the examination time for acquiring gonioscopic images (GS-1: 16 directions; manual gonioscopy: 8 directions). Furthermore, we compared the pain and discomfort scores during the examination using the Individualized Numeric Rating Scale. Among the images acquired by automated gonioscopy, we also evaluated the percentages of acquired images that could be used to determine the angle opening condition.
resultsThe examination time was not significantly different between manual (80.2±28.7) and automated gonioscopy (94.7±82.8) (p = 0.105). The pain score of automated gonioscopy (0.22±0.59) was significantly lower than that of manual gonioscopy (0.55±1.11) (p = 0.025). The discomfort score was not significantly different between manual (1.34±1.90) and automated gonioscopy (1.06±1.50) (p = 0.165). Automated gonioscopy successfully acquired clear gonioscopic images in 93.4% of the total images.
conclusionAutomated gonioscopy is comparable in examination time and invasiveness to manual gonioscopy and may be useful for 360-degree iridocorneal angle evaluation.
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.