ReviewInternational journal of ophthalmology2026
Intraocular pressure measurement in keratoconus: a narrative review.
Review in International journal of ophthalmology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) is essential for the diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma. Keratoconus (KC) is an ectatic corneal disease, which evolves with progressive non-inflammatory thinning and is characterized by irregular astigmatism, and alteration of corneal biomechanics. There are many doubts regarding the best method to measure IOP in patients with KC, and, as far as we know, there are no manometric studies in patients with KC. It seems that IOP measurements made by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) probably underestimate the real values in patients with KC. With the aim of obtaining more accurate measurements of IOP in KC, new devices were developed such as dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), ocular response analyzer (ORA) and corneal visualization scheimpflug technology (Corvis-ST). Possibly, DCT, corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc)-ORA, and biomechanical corrected IOP (bIOP)-Corvis-ST can reduce some inaccuracies in IOP measurements related to thinning central corneal thickness and other biomechanical changes present in these patients. The different IOP measurement methods in KC are not interchangeable. Therefore, in KC we must always monitor IOP using the same device during follow-up. Furthermore, it is necessary to carefully study possible structural and functional changes that may occur in suspected cases of glaucoma.
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.