ArticlePloS one2024
Evaluation of a new transpalpebral tonometer for self-measuring intraocular pressure.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe developed a novel transpalpebral self-tonometer called the TapEye tonometer (TET) based on palpation of the upper eyelid. Our goal was to evaluate a method for improving the accuracy of measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) through the eyelid.
methodsParticipants underwent standardized training by technicians and were required to be able to use the TET for study inclusion. Subsequently, a noncontact tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) were used. All participants were instructed to measure their IOPs using the three tonometers at baseline (visit 1) and at 1 month (visit 2). At visit 2, the corrected IOP value measured by the TET (c-TET) was calculated using the difference between the TET and GAT measurements obtained at visit 1.
resultsNo significant correlations were found between the TET and GAT measurements at any visit, but the correlation between the c-TET and GAT measurements at visit 2 was significant. The mean difference between the c-TET and GAT measurements was 0.4 ± 3.7 mmHg in the right eye and 0.5 ± 3.4 mmHg in the left eye.
conclusionsAfter correcting the IOP based on the difference between the TET and GAT measurements at the initial visit, the corrected IOP value of the TET was correlated with that of the GAT at the second visit. The TET has the potential to address an unmet need by providing a tool for minimally invasive IOP measurements.
trial registrationClinical trial registration number: jRCTs032220268.
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.