ArticleOphthalmology science
A Novel Contact Lens Sensor System for Continuous Intraocular Pressure Monitoring: Evaluation of Accuracy in Human Eyes.
Article in Ophthalmology science. 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.
- Contemporary Research Questions in the Field of Contact Lenses and Where to Next?Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring by a novel contact lens sensor system (CLS) in human eyes. Design: Cross sectional study. Participants: Eighty eyes of 80 participants were recruited and divided into 3 groups: (1) 40 normal eyes; (2) 30 eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT) with normal IOP (<21 mmHg), including 27 POAG eyes and 3 OHT eyes; and (3) 10 POAG/OHT eyes with high IOP (≥21 mmHg), comprising 4 POAG eyes and 6 OHT eyes. Methods: Participants wore the CLS to enable continuous monitoring of IOP while they assumed both seated and supine positions, with each position maintained for 10 minutes. Intraocular pressure was also measured by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) while participants were seated and the Perkins applanation tonometer (PAT) in supine, both before and after CLS wear. Main Outcome Measures: The average IOP measured by CLS during the final 1-minute of seated and supine positions was compared with IOP measured by GAT and PAT before and after CLS wear. Also, intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analyses were performed. Results: No significant differences were found between pre-CLS GAT and CLS in normal eyes or between all comparisons in POAG/OHT eyes with high IOP ( Conclusions: With good agreement in IOP measurement compared with applanation tonometry in seated and supine positions, across normal and POAG/OHT eyes, the CLS can be used for fairly accurate continuous IOP monitoring. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.