Observational studyJournal of glaucoma2025
Reliability of Self-Monitoring of Intraocular Pressure With iCare Home2 Rebound Tonometry.
Observational study in Journal of glaucoma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Influencing Intraocular Pressure Elevation During Hemodialysis.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Observational
- Supine and Sitting Intraocular Pressure Measurements Using iCare HOME2 Self-Tonometry and iCare IC200 Rebound Tonometry in Japanese Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Current and Emerging Technologies for Continuous Intraocular Pressure Monitoring in the Control of Glaucoma Progression: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PRÉCIS: Using iCare Home2 (iCare, Finland) rebound tonometry, self-measurement of intraocular pressure has demonstrated good reliability and ease of use. PURPOSE: To investigate the reliability and repeatability of self-measured intraocular pressure (IOP) with rebound tonometry using iCare Home2. PATIENTS AND
methodsOne hundred four patients out of 110 consecutive patients were recruited for this observational cross-sectional study. One randomly selected eye from each patient underwent 6 consecutive IOP measurements with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), iCare IC200, and iCare Home2. Every eye was tested twice with each device, in random order, by an ophthalmologist for GAT and IC200, and by the patient itself for Home2. In addition, central corneal thickness (CCT) has been collected. The reliability of Home2 has been tested by calculating limits of agreement (LoA) between self-measured and physician-measured IOP, using the Bland-Altman analysis. The repeatability of each device has been tested by calculating the limits of repeatability (LoR) with the same method. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine the correlation between differences in IOP measurements and CCT.
resultsThe mean difference between GAT and iCare Home2 was -0.28±1.57 mmHg ( P =0.070), 95%-LoA: (-3.36 to 2.79 mmHg). The mean difference between IC200 and iCare Home2 was 0.92±1.48 mmHg ( P <0.0001), 95%-LoA (-1.98 to 3.82 mmHg). The mean difference between the first and second measurements with GAT, iCare IC200, and iCare Home2 measurements was 0.21±0.98 mmHg ( P =0.03), -0.02±1.11 mmHg ( P =0.88) and -0.23±1.04 mmHg ( P =0.05).
conclusionsSelf-measured IOP with rebound tonometry showed good reliability and repeatability when compared with physician-measured IOP with both standard GAT and rebound tonometry.
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.