ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Refractive Predictability and Biometry Agreement of a Combined Swept Source Optical Coherence and Reflectometry Biometer Compared to an Optical Low Coherence Reflectometry Biometer and an SS-OCT Biometer.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Significance of Dry Eye Signs on Preoperative Keratometry Measurements in Patients Scheduled for Cataract Surgery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Trial
- Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery using swept-source OCT biometry and image-guided toric IOL alignment: a prospective comparative study in normal versus long axial length eyes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Level of Agreement of Intraocular Lens Power Measurements Between a Swept-Source OCT Biometer and a Partial Coherence Interferometer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a New Fully Automatic OLCR Biometer: Repeatability, Reproducibility, and Agreement with an SS-OCT Biometer.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Refractive Predictive Accuracy in Intraocular Lens Power Calculations: A Comparative Study of Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography and Optical Low-Coherence Interferometry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Sum of Segments Biometry in Modern Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Long Eyes.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- IOL Power Calculation Formulas in Post-LASIK Eyes Using Two Biometry Systems in Vietnam.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2025Article
- Accuracy Validation of the New Barrett True Axial Length Formula and the Optimized Lens Factor Using Sum-of-Segment Biometry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Current Concepts and Recent Updates of Optical Biometry- A Comprehensive Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- Comparison of ocular biometry and refractive outcomes using two swept-source optical coherence tomography-based biometers.PloS one · 2024Article
- Axial Length Correction in Evaluation of Refractive Predictability and Biometry Agreement [Letter].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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the agreement of refractive predictability of a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer, which uses segmental AL calculation, with another SS-OCT biometer, and an optical low coherence reflectometry (OLCR) biometer. The secondary objective was to describe the refractive outcomes, visual acuities, and the agreement of different preoperative biometric parameters. Patients and Methods: The study was a retrospective one-arm study of refractive and visual outcomes after successful cataract surgery. Preoperative biometric data were collected with two different SS-OCT device (Argos, Alcon Laboratories and Anterion, Heidelberg Engineering) and an OLCR device (Lenstar 900, Haag-Streit). The Barrett Universal II formula was used to calculate IOL power for all three devices. Follow-up examination was 1-2 months after surgery. The main outcome measure, refractive prediction error (RPE), was calculated as the achieved postoperative refraction minus the predicted refraction for each device. Absolute error (AE) was calculated by reducing the mean error to zero. Results: The study included 129 eyes of 129 patients. The mean RPE was 0.06, -0.14 and 0.17 D for the Argos, Anterion and Lenstar, respectively ( Conclusion: All three biometers showed good refractive predictability with no statistically significant differences in AE or percentages of eyes within ± 0.5 D of RPE or AE. The lowest arithmetic RPE was found with the Argos biometer.
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.