Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40741532›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Development and validation of the VAE-NT index: a novel biomechanical parameter for distinguishing subclinical corneal abnormalities.

Lanting Yang, Hui Xu, Honghu Jiang, Jingyin Zhu, Shihao Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lanting YangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Huadong Hospital, Fudan Universiry, Shanghai, China.
Hui XuNational Engineering Research Center of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Honghu JiangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Huadong Hospital, Fudan Universiry, Shanghai, China.
Jingyin ZhuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Huadong Hospital, Fudan Universiry, Shanghai, China.
Shihao ChenNational Engineering Research Center of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study is to develop an index for distinguishing between very asymmetric ectasia with normal topography (VAE-NT) eyes and normal eyes, with good performance in validity, reliability, and predictive values. Methods: In the training dataset, this single-center retrospective study involved 102 healthy eyes and 97 VAE-NT eyes. After propensity score matching (PSM), data from 53 healthy eyes and 53 VAE-NT eyes, including demographic and Corvis ST examination results, were collected. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated for the dynamic corneal response (DCR) parameters of Corvis ST. The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) model was used to objectively and comprehensively evaluate the Corvis ST DCRs, and logistic regression was used to determine the optimal combination of parameters that can accurately separate VAE-NT from normal corneas. In the validation dataset, 44 VAE-NT eyes and 49 normal eyes were involved. The validity, reliability, and predictive value of the index were further assessed using the validation dataset. The VAE-NT index was compared with the tomographic and biomechanical index (TBI) in both the training and validation datasets. Results: In the training dataset, the optimal parameter combination forming the VAE-NT index included the following DCRs: SP A1, SP HC, A1 Time, DA Ratio Max (2 mm), DA Ratio Max (1 mm), Integrated Radius, and stress-strain index version 2 (SSI2). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed an AUC value of 0.971, with a cut-off value of 0.425, an accuracy of 95.283%, a specificity of 94.340%, and a sensitivity of 96.230%. In the validation dataset, the AUC value of the VAE-NT index was 0.980. The sensitivity and specificity of the VAE-NT index were 93.180% and 95.920%, respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios of the VAE-NT index were 22.830 and 0.071, respectively. The ICC of the VAE-NT index was 0.835, and the accuracy was 94.624%. The VAE-NT index outperformed TBI in both the training and validation datasets. Conclusion: The VAE-NT index was developed, exhibiting high sensitivity, specificity, and AUC, along with favorable likelihood ratios and repeatability, suggesting that the VAE-NT index is a robust and reliable tool for distinguishing VAE-NT eyes from normal eyes. Further validation in broader populations and over longer follow-up periods is needed to support clinical translation.

Indexed as

corneal biomechanicsdynamic corneal response parameterskeratoconustechnique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solutionvery asymmetric ectasia with normal tomography

Identifiers

PMID40741532
PMCPMC12308140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.