The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility of central corneal thickness measurements by the Pentacam Scheimpflug imaging system (Oculus) and the optical low-coherence reflectometer (OLCR) pachymeter (Haag-Streit) and to compare them with those of ultrasound (US) pachymetry. SETTING: Assaf Harofe Medical Center Ophthalmology Outpatient Clinic, Zerifin, Israel. METHODS: Repeatability was determined from 10 successive measurements in each of 4 healthy patients. Reproducibility for the Pentacam Scheimpflug system was determined from measurements by 2 operators in each of 24 patients; in these 24 patients, central corneal thickness measurements were compared between the Pentacam and US pachymetry. For the OLCR pachymeter, reproducibility was determined from measurements by 2 operators in each of 16 patients, in whom central corneal thickness was also measured with the Pentacam. RESULTS: Mean coefficient of repeatability was 0.84% for the Pentacam Scheimpflug system and 0.33% for the OLCR pachymeter. For the Pentacam, the coefficient of interoperator reproducibility was 1.10% and the 95% limits of agreement were -10.2 microm to +11.9 microm. Mean difference between Pentacam and US was 6.09 microm. For the OLCR pachymeter, the coefficient of interoperator reproducibility was 0.59% and the 95% limits of agreement were -5.4 microm to +7.0 microm. Mean difference between central corneal thickness values obtained with the OLCR pachymeter and Pentacam Scheimpflug system was 1.7 microm. CONCLUSIONS: Objective, noncontact measurement of central corneal thickness with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system and OLCR pachymeter was convenient and yielded excellent intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility. Central corneal thickness values obtained with the Pentacam were similar to those obtained with both the OLCR pachymeter and an US pachymeter. Further research is needed to corroborate whether central corneal thickness measurements by the Pentacam and OLCR devices can be used interchangeably and are more clinically useful than US pachymetry.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Ambrósio, R., Alonso, R. S., Luz, A., & Coca Velarde, L. G. (2006) · Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.06.025 · Cited by 451
Age-related changes in optical and biometric characteristics of emmetropic eyes
Atchison, D. A., Markwell, E. L., Kasthurirangan, S., Pope, J. M., Smith, G., & Swann, P. G. (2008) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/8.4.29 · Cited by 270
Metadata
- Authors
- Barkana, Y., Gerber, Y., Elbaz, U., Schwartz, S., Ken-Dror, G., Avni, I., & Zadok, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1729-1735
- ISSN
- 0146-2776 (ISSN-L)
- 0886-3350
- OpenAlex
- W2158798726
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.03.058
- The paper
- Barkana, Y., Gerber, Y., Elbaz, U., Schwartz, S., Ken-Dror, G., Avni, I., & Zadok, D. (2005). Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.03.058
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.