ArticlePloS one2025
The impact of age, gender, and ocular parameters on corneal biomechanics in Chinese refractive candidates.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Data-Driven Redefinition of Normal Intraocular Pressure in Nonglaucomatous Korean Adult Population.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Multifactorial analysis of corneal biomechanical stability after deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty: integration of anterior segment imaging indices and ocular response analyzer data.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- The influence of ocular parameters on intraocular pressure values measured by different devices and the development of an optimized prediction model in a myopic population.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
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
We aimed to quantify the distribution of corneal biomechanics in healthy, myopic Chinese candidates for refractive surgery using an ocular response analyzer, and explore factors that influence corneal biomechanics. In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 1,090 eyes from 1090 myopic patients scheduled for refractive surgery at the Refractive Center of Dalian Third People's Hospital between January 2021 and May 2022 were examined. Participants were categorized into three groups based on spherical equivalent power: low myopia (SE> -3.00D), moderate myopia (>-6.00D < SE ≤ -3.00D), and high myopia (SE ≤ -6.00D); then further categorized by central corneal thickness into four groups: < 500μm, 500 to <550μm, 550 to <600μm, and ≥600μm. The Ocular Response Analyzer was used to measure corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF). Differences in CH and CRF were compared across groups. Generalized estimating equations were applied to determine correlations between CH and CRF and variables such as sex, age, corneal keratometry, central corneal thickness, white-to-white corneal diameter, and spherical equivalent power. The average corneal hysteresis (CH) was 11.18 ± 1.35 mmHg, while the average corneal resistance factor (CRF) was 11.22 ± 1.64 mmHg. The average CRF values were significantly higher in men than in women (P < 0.05). In the high myopia group, CH values were significantly lower than those in the moderate and low myopia groups (P < 0.01). CH and CRF increased with corneal thickness across all groups, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.01). Generalized estimating equations showed a positive correlation between corneal thickness and curvature with both CH and CRF (all P < 0.01). Age was negative correlation between CH and CRF (all P < 0.05). Spherical equivalent power was positively correlated with CH (P < 0.01). Corneal thickness, curvature, and refractive power significantly affected corneal measurement values in individuals with myopia. The CH and CRF values increased with increasing corneal thickness and curvature, and CH was negatively correlated with the severity of myopia.
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.