ArticleScientific reports2024
Predicting accuracy of spherical equivalent after cataract surgery using the online Zcalc calculator for toric IOLs.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Six Toric IOL Power Calculation Formulas, Including Four Available on the ESCRS Online Calculator.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Compare Zcalc with other formulas on spherical equivalent prediction errors (PE) and explore the relationship between PE and ocular parameters. Optimize 709 IOL power calculation. 114 eyes with age-related cataract and preoperative regular corneal astigmatism of more than 1.5D were included. They underwent cataract surgery followed by implantation of a toric intraocular lens (Zeiss Torbi 709 M) calculated by Zcalc formula. The prediction errors of spherical equivalent (SE) were analysed 3 months post-surgery. The refractive prediction errors of Zcalc, Barrett Universal II, Kane, and K6 formulas were 0.07 ± 0.63D, - 0.36 ± 0.65D, - 0.41 ± 0.67D, and - 0.31 ± 0.66D, respectively. Statistically significant difference were observed between Zcalc and other formulas. The Zcalc was prone to positive deviation, Barrett Universal II, Kane and K6 were prone to negative deviation. When the axial length is greater than 29.0 mm, the prediction errors of Kane is higher, and prone to negative deviation. Prediction errors of Zcalc are small in all eyes and prone to positive deviation. For more accurate prediction, we recommend Barrett Universal II formula for 709 IOL power calculation.
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.