ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2026
Determination of corneal phase and group refractive indices
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Precise determination of corneal refractive indices is essential for accurate refractive power calculations, personalized refractive surgery planning, and glaucoma management. However, current clinical methods fail to distinguish between the group refractive index ( Aim: We aim to develop a multimodal measurement system integrating spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and confocal scanning for the precise extraction of the Approach: A dual-modality platform sharing an 860 nm source was constructed to jointly capture the optical path length (OPL) and confocal distance. A two-step progressive workflow was implemented: first, the Results: System validation using optical window plates yielded a relative error of only 0.01% to 0.09% for Conclusions: This technique successfully resolves the
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.