ArticlePloS one2025
Repeatability of biometric measures from the LenStar LS900 in a cataractous population.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the repeatability of biometric measures and assess interactions between their uncertainties for use in an error propagation model, using patient data.
methodsCross-sectional non-randomised study evaluating a dataset containing 969 LenStar 900 biometric measurements taken before cataract surgery. Only complete scans with at least 3 successful measurements for each eye performed on the same day were considered. For each sequence, the aggregated mean (AMEAN) and population standard deviations (ASD) were derived. The within-subject standard deviation Sw was extracted for: corneal thickness, CCT, anterior chamber depth ACD, lens thickness LT, axial length AL, corneal diameter WTW, and the keratometric power vector components equivalent power KEQ, and the projections of corneal astigmatism KC0 and KC45. Correlations between the uncertainties were assessed using Spearman rank correlations.
resultsFor the 266 eyes matching the inclusion criteria, Sw was 3.6/ 24.7/35.5/ 17.7/ 107.5 µm for CCT/ ACD/ LT/ AL WTW and 0.18/ 0.12/ 0.10 dioptres for KEQ/ KC0/ KC45. The keratometric axis ASD is inversely proportional to the keratometric astigmatism AMEAN. LT and ACD uncertainties are strongly negatively correlated, with KEQ and KC0 uncertainties moderately correlated.
conclusionsThe uncertainty and correlation data presented here could be used to define a Monte-Carlo based error propagation model mapping the biometric measures and uncertainties to variations in predicted refraction after cataract surgery. We recommend using power vector components for error propagation models since the large decay over keratometric astigmatism makes keratometric axis uncertainty unreliable.
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.