ArticleBMC ophthalmology2023
Clinical observation of tear film breakup time with a novel smartphone-attachable technology.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interobserver Reliability of Tear Break-Up Time Examination Using "Smart Eye Camera" in Indonesian Remote Area.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo demonstrate the practicability of a portable instrument in assessing tear film breakup time (TFBUT): a lens attachment for smartphones (LAS).
methodsBy applying LAS in combination with the iPhone 12 pro, and a recordable slit-lamp microscope, we obtained TFBUT videos from 58 volunteers. The comparison between the conventional slit-lamp microscope and LAS by an experienced ophthalmologist. Moreover, we also invited an ophthalmic postgraduate student and an undergraduate student with no clinical experience to assess TFBUT in those videos. The inter-observer reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
resultsThe TFBUT of 116 eyes in total was recorded. Reliability indexes were adequate. The Spearman's correlation analysis and the intraclass correlation coefficient suggested a strong correlation between the 2 modalities (Right eye: Spearman's r = 0.929, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.847-0.963, ICC = 0.978, p < 0.001; Left eye: Spearman's r = 0.931, 95% CI = 0.866-0.964, ICC = 0.985, p < 0.001;). Between instruments, the majority of TFBUT measurements showed good agreement on Bland Altman plot. A high concordance was observed in TFBUT, when assessed by an ophthalmologist and an ophthalmic postgraduate student (Left eye: LAS ICC = 0.951, p < 0.001; Left eye: slit-lamp microscope ICC = 0.944, p < 0.001).
conclusionsCompared with the conventional slit-lamp microscope, the LAS has sufficient validity for evaluating TFBUT in clinics or at home.
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.