ArticleScientific reports2025
Agreement and repeatability of ocular surface function using the S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp compared with Keratograph 5M.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analytical Performance, Spatial Dynamics and Clinically Meaningful Change Thresholds for Automated Non-invasive Tear Film Assessment Using the Oculus Keratograph 5M.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the agreement and repeatability of the S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp (S390L WDR+D130, MediWorks, Shanghai, China) in tear film-related parameters measurement compared with Keratograph 5M(K5M) (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). This prospective study assessed tear film parameters, including first non-invasive tear break-up time (NIBUTf), average non-invasive tear break-up time (NIBUTav), and tear meniscus height (TMH) using the S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp and K5M. Bland-Altman (BA) plots and the correlation coefficient r were used to assess the agreement of tear film parameters of two ocular surface analyzers. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the repeatability of the S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp and K5M. Forty-four subjects from Shenyang He Eye Specialist Hospital were recruited in this study. There were no significant differences in the paired comparisons of NIBUTf, NIBUTav, and TMH (p > 0.05). The BA plots analysis showed a good agreement between the two devices for the NIBUTf (95% LoA, - 2.7 to 2.6), NIBUTav (95% LoA, - 4.5 to 3.6) and TMH (95% LoA, - 0.05 to 0.04). ICC of NIBUTf, NIBUTav, and TMH between the two measurements using S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp was 0.89, 0.84, and 0.98, respectively. The tear film-related parameters measurement of S390L Firefly WDR slitlamp had good repeatability and acceptable agreement with K5M. This study suggested a novel technique S390L Firefly WDR slitlampcan be considered an alternative to K5M in clinical settings, with an acceptable level of intrasession repeatability for clinical evaluation of tear film parameters.
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.