ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Repeatability and agreement of a Scheimpflug-Placido tomography and a Partial Coherence Interferometer in keratoconus and control eyes.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo assess the repeatability and agreement of anterior segment measurements obtained using a partial coherence interferometry-based optical biometry device (AL-Scan) and a combined Scheimpflug-Placido disc corneal topography device (Sirius) in keratoconic and control eyes.
methodsCentral corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white-to-white distance (WTW), and keratometry values were measured in keratoconic and control eyes using the AL-Scan and Sirius. The agreement, repeatability, and reliability of the measurements were analyzed.
resultsThe study included 82 keratoconus patients (82 eyes) and 100 healthy subjects (100 eyes). The mean CCT and ACD values measured by Sirius were significantly higher than those measured by AL-Scan in both groups (p < 0.001). WTW measurements did not differ significantly between devices (p > 0.05). In control eyes, keratometric values showed no significant differences between devices, whereas in keratoconic eyes, almost all keratometric values were significantly different. Reliability was excellent for all parameters in both devices (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.9). Repeatability was excellent for all parameters in both devices (coefficient of variation [CoV] < 1%), except for CCT in keratoconic eyes (CoV < 3%). CONCLUSıONS: Both the AL-Scan and Sirius provide highly repeatable and reliable measurements in both healthy and keratoconic eyes. However, in keratoconic eyes, agreement between the two devices is poor for all parameters except WTW.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40119977What 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.