ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Comparison of Scheimpflug tomography, Placido disc, and combined Placido Scheimpflug in the measurement of pupil offset in myopic population.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Refractive and Visual Outcomes of SmartSight NOVA Refractive Lenticule Extraction for Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism at 3 Months: a Retrospective Case Series.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Ocular biometry agreement among ZW-30, IOLMaster 700, and sirius in cataract patients.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to compare the consistency of pupil offset measurements obtained using the Pentacam, Keratron Scout, and Sirius devices. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 146 young myopic individuals (292 eyes) scheduled for refractive surgery at Dalian Third People's Hospital between January 2023 and December 2023. Three devices were utilized to measure the chord mu of the pupil deviation along with the Cartesian distances of the X and Y coordinates (Px, Py) associated with the pupil offset. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare differences in pupil offset acquisition across various devices. Additionally, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plot were utilized to assess the consistency among the three devices. Results: Chord mu, measured using the Pentacam, Keratron Scout, and Sirius devices, were 0.18 ± 0.10, 0.21 ± 0.11, and 0.18 ± 0.11, respectively. The Px values were 0.00 ± 0.14, -0.02 ± 0.16, and -0.01 ± 0.13, respectively, while the Py values were 0.09 ± 0.13, 0.10 ± 0.15, and 0.10 ± 0.13. The ICCs for the three device measurements, chord mu, Px, and Py, were 0.817, 0.900, and 0.855, respectively. When comparing the three devices, the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) for mu and Px measured using the Sirius and Keratron Scout were the narrowest, ranging from -0.15 to 0.08 and -0.11 to 0.13, respectively. Additionally, the 95% LoA for Py measured using the Sirius and Pentacam was the narrowest, ranging from -0.13 to 0.15. The pupil centers in both eyes were predominantly located above the apex of the cornea. Conclusion: Sirius, Keratron Scout, and Pentacam have good consistency in pupil shift measurement in young myopic patients, and the three devices can be used as references in clinical practice.
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.