ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Analysis of astigmatism type influence on
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of astigmatism type on Methods: This prospective observational comparative study included 155 eyes from 155 participants. Corneal tomographic and biomechanical parameters were obtained using Pentacam and Corvis ST. Participants were classified into four groups according to astigmatism axis and cylinder power: no astigmatism (n = 30), with-the-rule astigmatism (WTR, n = 50), against-the-rule astigmatism (ATR, n = 37), and oblique astigmatism (Oblique, n = 38). Cylinder power and axis were decomposed into Thibos power vector components (J0, J45). Differences in 15 dynamic corneal response (DCR) parameters among the four groups were compared using one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Partial correlation analysis and multiple linear regression were performed to evaluate the correlations between J0/J45 and DCR parameters after adjusting for confounding factors, followed by within-subgroup analyses. Results: After adjustment for intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness, and age, the stiffness parameter SP-A1 differed significantly among the four groups (P = 0.007). The WTR group had higher SP-A1 than the ATR group (mean diff = 4.89 mmHg/mm, P = 0.0284) and the Oblique group (mean diff = 5.32 mmHg/mm, P = 0.0122). Multiple linear regression showed that J0 was independently correlated with Integrated Radius (β = 0.196), HC dArc length (β = 0.223), SP-A1 (β = 0.101), Radius (β = -0.182) and SSI (β = -0.181, all P < 0.05). J45 was independently associated with A1 time (β = -0.033) and A2 velocity (β = -0.156, both P < 0.05). Conclusion:
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.