Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38983996›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Comparative Analysis of Keratometric and Pachymetry Values From Corneal Topography Scans: A Comparison Between Pentacam and Galilei.

Usman Tariq, Shagufta Parveen, Salman Mahmood Wazir, Taimoor A Khan, Muhammad A Zahid, Muhammad Tariq Bangash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Usman TariqOphthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology, Rawalpindi, PAK.
Shagufta ParveenOphthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology, Rawalpindi, PAK.
Salman Mahmood WazirGeneral Practice, National University of Medical Sciences, Rawalpindi, PAK.
Taimoor A KhanOphthalmology, National University of Medical Sciences, Rawalpindi, PAK.
Muhammad A ZahidOphthalmology, Monash Health, Clayton, AUS.
Muhammad Tariq BangashOphthalmology, Islamic International Medical College, Sialkot, PAK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study was to compare K1, K2, Kmax, and pachymetry values from Pentacam and Galilei scans of corneal topography in order to assess their correlation and interchangeability in clinical practice. Methodology A total of 34 patients (68 eyes) were enrolled in the study. Corneal topography was performed using Pentacam and Galilei devices on the same day. K1, K2, Kmax, and pachymetry readings were obtained from the scans and analyzed using paired t-tests and Bland-Altman plots. Results There were minimal differences in clinical settings between Pentacam and Galilei for K1, K2, Kmax (>0.75 D), and pachymetry values (>15 um). However, there was a statistically significant difference found between Kmax and pachymetry, making their interchangeability questionable. Conclusion Pentacam and Galilei demonstrate a good correlation between corneal keratometric values (K1, K2, and Kmax) and pachymetry values in clinical settings, and they should be used interchangeably with caution.

Indexed as

comparisongalileikeratometricpachymeterypentacam

Identifiers

PMID38983996
PMCPMC11233126

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.