ArticleVision (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Clinical Evaluation of an Affordable Handheld Wavefront Autorefractor in an Adult Population in a Low-Resource Setting in the Amazonas.
Article in Vision (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates the ability of the QuickSee Free (QSF) portable autorefractor (PlenOptika) to detect and measure refractive error compared to subjective clinical refractometry (SCR) in a Brazilian adult population in a low-resource setting in Amazonas. A total of 100 participants aged 18-65 years underwent visual acuity screening and autorefraction with and without cycloplegia using the QSF, alongside a complete ophthalmic examination including SCR. Refractive error measurements included spherical component (SC), cylindrical component (CC), cylindrical axis (CA), spherical equivalent (SE), and vector powers (MV90 and MV135). Accuracy was assessed for hyperopia ≥ +2.00 D, myopia ≤ -0.75 D, astigmatism ≥ 1.00 DC, and anisometropia ≥ 1.00 D using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The area under the curve for detecting significant refractive errors ranged from 0.538 to 0.930. The mean difference between QSF without cycloplegia and SCR was -1.08 ± 1.17 D for SC and -1.15 ± 1.15 D for SE (
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.