ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2026
Comparison of White-to-White Measurements Between Pentacam and MS-39 and Their Relationship with Visual and Refractive Status.
Article in Turkish 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare white-to-white (WTW) measurements obtained by Pentacam and MS-39 and to assess their relationship with visual and refractive status. Materials and Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study included 126 participants (one eye per participant). Visual acuity was measured with and without correction using a Snellen chart and converted to logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). Refractive status was determined by manifest refraction, and the spherical equivalent was calculated. WTW measurements were determined using Pentacam and MS-39. For paired comparisons, Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement between the two devices. Spearman test was used to evaluate the correlation with visual and refractive variables. Results: The mean age of the participants was 27.21±5.64 years. Mean uncorrected distance and corrected visual acuities were 1.11±0.45 logMAR and 0.05±0.20 logMAR, respectively. The mean spherical equivalent was -4.02±2.03 diopters. The mean WTW distance was 11.82±0.41 mm with Pentacam and 11.83±0.43 mm with MS-39. No statistically significant paired difference was found between the devices (W=3839.5, p=0.584). A Bland-Altman mean bias of -0.009 mm suggested a small systematic difference between the two devices. Intraclass correlation showed good agreement (ICC=0.847, 95% confidence interval: 0.789-0.890; p<0.001). While there was no significant correlation with corrected distance visual acuity, both WTW measures had weak but significant correlations with uncorrected distance visual acuity and spherical equivalent. Conclusion: Pentacam and MS-39 produce comparable results overall and show strong agreement for WTW measurements. While the inter-device difference was unaffected by visual and refractive state, WTW showed minor correlations with unaided visual acuity and refractive error.
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.