ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology
Cross-Sectional Study of Differences between Intraocular Pressure Measurements using Goldmann, iCare, and Air-Puff Tonometers and their Correlation with Central Corneal Thickness.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology. 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.
- Intraocular pressure measurement in keratoconus: a narrative review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the agreement between the Goldmann tonometer (GAT), the air-puff tonometer, and the iCare tonometer in intraocular pressure (IOP) evaluation as well as their association with central corneal thickness (CCT) in normal participants, glaucoma patients, and patients following refractive surgery. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted on 204 eyes from 102 patients. The study consisted of three equal groups: group I (control group, Results: A total of 102 participants were included in the study with both genders distributed equally. The mean ± standard deviation age was 44.12 ± 12.8 years in the control group while it was 46.29 ± 13.24 years in the glaucoma group and 40.68 ± 15.86 years in the refractive surgery group. Overall, there was a high correlation between the three methods. The mean IOP measured by GAT was 14.03 ± 3.43. The mean IOP measured by iCare was 15.16 ± 3.46. The mean IOP measured by air-puff was 16.66 ± 3.6. The iCare showed the most significant agreement with the GAT (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.985, Conclusions: In conclusion, the iCare tonometer, specifically the iCare PRO RT model, is a reliable and efficient alternative instrument for assessing IOP. The IOP values obtained with the iCare PRO RT were found to be consistent with those obtained using the air-puff and GAT.
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.