Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37465503›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2023

Comparison of total corneal power measurements obtained with different devices after myopic keratorefractive surgery.

Zi-Yang Wang, Yan-Zheng Song, Wen-Li Yang, Qian Liu, Yi-Feng Li, Rui Cui, Lin Shen, Chang-Bin Zhai

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 80% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zi-Yang WangBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Yan-Zheng SongBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Wen-Li YangBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Qian LiuBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Yi-Feng LiBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Rui CuiBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Lin ShenBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Chang-Bin ZhaiBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100730, China.
Beijing Tongren Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo analyze the differences, agreements, and correlation among total corneal power parameters generated by different instruments after myopic keratorefractive surgery.

methodsThe prospective cross-sectional study included patients who underwent myopic keratorefractive surgery and received measurements of corneal power 3mo after surgery. Automated keratometer was used for the measurement of simulated keratometry (SimK), swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) based biometer for total keratometry (TK), anterior segment-OCT for real keratometry (RK), and Scheimpflug keratometer for the true net power (TNP), the total corneal refractive power (TCRP) and equivalent K-readings (EKR). The differences among these parameters were analyzed, and the agreements and correlation between SimK and other total corneal power parameters were investigated.

resultsA total of 70 eyes of 70 patients after myopic keratorefractive surgery were included. The evaluated corneal power parameters were as follows: SimK 38.32±1.93 D, TK 37.54±2.12 D, RK 36.64±2.09 D, TNP 36.56±1.97 D, TCRP 36.70±2.01 D, and EKR 37.55±2.00 D. Pairwise comparison showed that there were significant differences (

conclusionAmong the corneal power parameters after myopic keratorefractive surgery, the value of SimK is the largest, followed by TK and EKR, with TCRP, RK, and TNP being the smallest. The differences among the parameters may be attributable to the different calculation principles. Correct understanding and evaluation of corneal power parameters can provide a theoretical basis for taking advantage of the total corneal power to improve the accuracy of intraocular lens calculation after keratorefractive surgery.

Indexed as

corneal powerkeratorefractive surgerytotal keratometry

Identifiers

PMID37465503
PMCPMC10333248
OpenAlexW4382195918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.