Observational studyScientific reports2024
Agreement and repeatability of scotopic pupil size measurement with the 2WIN-S portable refractor in Chinese adults.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association Between Pupil Area and the Efficacy of Peripheral Defocus Spectacle Lenses in Myopia Control.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- To Evaluate the Agreement and Repeatability of the Eyerobo VS Portable Autorefractor Cycloplegic Refraction in Children and Adolescents.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Correlation between pupillary light reflex (PLR) amplitude and visual function in primary angle-closure glaucoma: a retrospective clinical study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Factors Affecting Ray Trace LASIK Data Acquisition in Clinical Practice: Options for Addressing Accommodation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess the agreement and repeatability of scotopic pupil size measurement using 2WIN-S (Adaptica, Padova, Italy) portable refractor in Chinese adults. This prospective non-randomized open-label controlled study assessed the scotopic pupil size of 100 right eyes using OPD-Scan III (Optical path difference) (Nidek Technologies, Gamagori, Japan) and 2WIN-S. OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S measure pupil size using infrared light and detector, while 2WIN-S measures bilateral eyes simultaneously, OPD-Scan III measures unilateral eyes individually. Participants were first measured once using OPD-Scan III and two consecutive measurements were performed using 2WIN-S after 15 min of rest interval. The primary outcome was to evaluate the agreement between 2WIN-S and OPD-Scan III, and the secondary outcome was to evaluate the repeatability of 2WIN-S. Scotopic pupil size of 100 right eyes of 100 adults (28 male and 72 female) aged 18-53 years (mean 36 ± 12 years) was assessed using OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S, respectively. The mean scotopic pupil size of OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S was recorded to be 6.24 ± 0.88 mm and 6.27 ± 0.81 mm, respectively. For the mean scotopic pupil size of OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S the difference was - 0.03 mm (95%CI - 0.10 to 0.04 mm), p = 0.445, the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) was - 0.71 to 0.66 mm. ICC between the two devices was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.94) (ICC > 0.9 indicates excellent consistency). Coefficients of repeatability (CoR) of 2WIN-S was 0.37, which has a high repeatability. For the mean scotopic pupil size of 2WIN-S of the repeated measurements, the difference was -0.04 mm (95%CI - 0.08 to 0.01 mm), p = 0.019, the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) was - 0.41 to 0.32 mm, with a narrow LOA. However, the majority of the variations were less than ± 0.50 mm (98% of scotopic pupil size measurements were below this threshold), within the clinically acceptable range (± 0.50 mm). Our study showed excellent agreement between 2WIN-S and OPD-Scan III (ICC > 0.9) and a good repeatability of 2WIN-S (CoR = 0.37). This study suggests a novel technique for measuring pupillary responses in low light conditions, which can be considered an alternative to OPD-Scan III in clinical settings.
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.