ArticleClinical & experimental ophthalmology
Predictive Correction Model for Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism With IOLMaster700 Keratometry Data in a Cataractous Population.
Article in Clinical & experimental ophthalmology. 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.
- Predictive Correction Model for Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism With IOLMaster700 Keratometry Data in a Cataractous Population.Clinical & experimental ophthalmologyArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundTo develop and validate various models to predict total keratometry (TK) power vector components TKC0 and TKC45 from classical keratometry (K) KC0 and KC45 based on a large dataset of pre cataract surgery IOLMaster 700 measurements.
methodsRetrospective cross-sectional multicentric study evaluating a dataset containing 13 6378 IOLMaster 700 measurements including K and TK. Left eyes were mirrored about the facial axis. Based on 80% training data, we developed a global and segmented constant model (CM and CMS), a global and segmented (according to the angle A1 of the flat keratometric meridian) linear model (LM and LMS), a harmonic model (HM) and compared these to a classical constant (CMR) and linear models (LMR) segmented into with-the-rule, against-the-rule and oblique astigmatism. The performance was cross-validated using the root-mean-squared model fit error (RMSE).
resultsIn the 20% test data, RMSE was 0.173 D before correction and was reduced by 40%-42% to 0.100 and 0.104 D with the correction models. The segmented models performed slightly better than the global models, and the linear models performed slightly better than the constant models. With the individually adjusted changepoints, the CMS and LMS performed slightly better than the reference models CMR and LMR. There was no systematic difference between the RMSE with training and test data, indicating no overfit of the models.
conclusionAs the performance is quite similar for all tested correction models, we recommend using a simple global constant model to predict TK vector components. This could easily be implemented in any consumer software.
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.