Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37660153›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Comparing clinical outcomes of Optiwave Refractive Analysis, Lenstar, and surgeon's modified method for intraocular lens power calculation in Asian eyes.

Hung-Yuan Lin, Shu-Ting Kao, Shuan Chen, Ya-Jung Chuang, Pi-Jung Lin

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 71% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Hung-Yuan LinUniversal Eye Center, Zhong-Li, Taipei City, 10660, Taiwan.
Shu-Ting KaoYee-Hong Clinic, New Taipei City, 23447, Taiwan. ginakao0430@gmail.com.
Shuan ChenUniversal Eye Center, Long-Tan, Taipei City, 10660, Taiwan.
Ya-Jung ChuangUniversal Eye Center, Long-Tan, Taipei City, 10660, Taiwan.
Pi-Jung LinUniversal Eye Center, Long-Tan, Taipei City, 10660, Taiwan.
Eye Center · SATaipei City Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study aimed to compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation to predict postoperative refraction by Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA), Lenstar LS 900, and the surgeon's Modify method in normal Asian eyes. The IOL power of the Lenstar group was calculated according to Lenstar LS 900, whereas the surgeon's Modify group used topography, axial length (AL) of Lenstar, and Barrett Universal II online formula. Intraoperative aphakic measurements and IOL power calculations were obtained with the ORA system. From the results acquired through Lenstar, Modify, and ORA, the surgeon used his judgment to select the actual IOL power. Postoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was obtained 2 months after surgery. The prediction error (PE) was calculated as the difference between the postoperative MRSE and the target refraction proposed by three methods. AL, anterior chamber depth (ACD, measured from corneal endothelium to lens), lens thickness (LT), and ACD + 1/2LT were also included in the survey. In 67 eyes, the average real PE was smaller for the Lenstar (0.06 ± 0.44) and Modify (- 0.05 ± 0.40) than for the ORA group (- 0.25 ± 0.60, p < 0.05). The ORA system demonstrated the best results of IOL power selection in eyes with a normal range of ACD + 0.5 LT (5.2-5.6 mm) in Asian eyes.

Indexed as

Lenses, IntraocularSurgeonsEndothelium, CornealHumansRefraction, OcularVision Tests

Identifiers

PMID37660153
PMCPMC10475043
OpenAlexW4386391032

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.