Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026610›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023

Assessing Agreement and Variability Among Alternative Devices for Intraocular Pressure Measurement: A Comparative Study.

Chen-Wei Lin, Jin-Jhe Wang, Chien-Hsiung Lai, Chau-Yin Chen, Ing-Chou Lai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Chen-Wei Lin *Department of Medical Education, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, 61363, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-7025-2770
Jin-Jhe Wang *Department of Ophthalmology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, 61363, Taiwan.
Chien-Hsiung LaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, 61363, Taiwan.
Chau-Yin ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, 61363, Taiwan.
Ing-Chou LaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, 61363, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement is critical in diagnosing and managing eye conditions. This study aims to assess the comparability of three alternative devices for measuring IOP: Noncontact tonometer, Icare rebound tonometer, and Tono-Pen. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study included 172 adult participants (87 males and 85 females) who underwent IOP and central corneal thickness (CCT) assessments. IOP was measured using Noncontact (Canon TX-20), Icare (Icare TA01i), and Tono-Pen (Tonopen XL). CCT was measured with the built-in pachymetry of the Noncontact tonometer. Correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses were conducted to assess the relationships and agreements between these tonometers. Participants were grouped based on IOP and CCT levels. The mean of the standard deviation of the three tonometer results was calculated to evaluate measurement result variability. One-way analysis of variance was conducted for comparing between the groups. Results: IOP measurements among the three devices were not significantly different, indicating their comparability. Correlation analysis revealed strong correlations between the tonometers. Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement, with the Icare rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen exhibiting narrower limits of agreement. Furthermore, IOP levels influenced measurement result variability, with higher IOP levels associated with greater variance. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the alternative devices examined can provide reliable IOP measurements. It highlights the potential of these alternative devices for IOP measurement. These findings have implications for clinical practice, offering practitioners additional tools for accurate IOP assessment.

Indexed as

icareintraocular pressurenoncontacttonometerTono-Pen

Identifiers

PMID38026610
PMCPMC10657745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.