ArticleEye and vision (London, England)2026
Clinical evaluation of a new fully automated biometer integrating optical low-coherence reflectometry and Placido-disk topography.
Article in Eye and vision (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate the precision (intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility) of the AL550, an automated biometer that integrates optical low-coherence reflectometry with Placido-disk topography, and to assess the inter-device agreement with the IOLMaster 700.
methodsThis prospective study enrolled 112 healthy participants. Each participant underwent three consecutive right-eye measurements by two operators with different levels of experience using the AL550 to assess intraobserver and interobserver variability. Additionally, three measurements were obtained by a skilled operator using the IOLMaster 700 for inter-device comparison. The parameters assessed included axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), flattest, steepest, and mean keratometry (Kf, Ks, and Km), astigmatism, and corneal diameter (CD). Measurement precision was analyzed using the within-subject standard deviation (Sw), test-retest repeatability (TRT), coefficient of variation (CoV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Inter-device agreement was assessed using paired t-tests and Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsThe AL550 demonstrated excellent repeatability and reproducibility across all parameters, with low Sw, TRT, and CoV values, and ICCs exceeding 0.939. Inter-device agreement with the IOLMaster 700 was excellent for most parameters, with narrow 95% limits of agreement (LoA) (AL: - 0.09 to 0.08 mm, CCT: - 16.55 to 5.46 μm, ACD: - 0.04 to 0.18 mm, LT: - 0.27 to 0.07 mm, Km: - 0.26 to 0.26 D). However, CD exhibited a wider 95% LoA (- 0.82 to - 0.15 mm).
conclusionThe AL550 provides highly repeatable and reproducible biometric measurements with minimal operator dependence. Inter-device agreement with the IOLMaster 700 was excellent for all parameters except CD, suggesting that the two devices may be used interchangeably in clinical practice.
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.