Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38938385›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024

A comparison of intraocular pressure measurement using SUOER SW-500 rebound tonometer and conventional reusable Goldmann prisms.

Jia Quan Chaung, Thanendthire Sangapillai, Karen Kate Quilat, Shamira Perera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Intraocular pressure measurement in keratoconus: a narrative review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
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

4 authors.

Jia Quan ChaungSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Thanendthire SangapillaiSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Karen Kate QuilatSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Shamira PereraSingapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To determine the agreement between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using conventional Goldmann applanation tonometry (GA Methods: This was a retrospective observational study where 205 eyes of 106 glaucoma patients had their IOPs measured by 2 fellowship trained ophthalmologists. Data were analyzed using the Bland-Altman method of differences. Correlation was measured using the Pearson coefficient. Results: Most of our patients were Chinese (88.7%) and female (51.9%). The average age was 66.9 years. The range of IOPs as measured by GAT was 2 to 58 mm Hg. Using the Bland-Altman method to compare GAT and SUOER SW-500 Rebound Tonometer. The tonometer overestimated the IOP by 0.5 mm Hg in the right eye and underestimated it by 0.1 mm Hg in the left eye. Overall, the tonometer overestimated the IOP by 0.2 mmHg. The Tonometer IOP correlated well with GAT, with a Pearson coefficient of correlation( Discussion: The IOP measurements from the SUOER SW-500 Rebound Tonometer correlates well with the conventional GAT in measuring the IOP within normal ranges of IOP. SUOER SW-500 Rebound Tonometer may be of use, especially if the risk of transmission of infection is high considering that the probes are disposable. It is easy to use and its small size and portability makes it useful in situations where the patient is unable to be examined at the slit lamp.

Indexed as

glaucomaGoldmann applanation tonometryintraocular pressureIOPrebound tonometer

Identifiers

PMID38938385
PMCPMC11208312

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.