Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 248

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Ocular Component Growth Curves among Refractive Error Groups in Children

Jones, Lisa A., Mitchell, G. Lynn, Mutti, Donald O., Hayes, John R., Moeschberger, Melvin L., Zadnik, Karla·2005·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare ocular component growth curves among four refractive error groups in children. methods Cycloplegic refractive error was categorized into four groups: persistent emmetropia between -0.25 and +1.00 D (exclusive) in both the vertical and horizontal meridians on all study visits (n = 194); myopia of at least -0.75 D in both meridians on at least one visit (n = 247); persistent hyperopia of at least +1.00 D in both meridians on all visits (n = 43); and emmetropizing hyperopia of at least +1.00 D in both meridians on at least the first but not at all visits (n = 253). Subjects were seen for three visits or more between the ages of 6 and 14 years. Growth curves were modeled for the persistent emmetropes to describe the relation between age and the ocular components and were applied to the other three refractive error groups to determine significant differences. results At baseline, eyes of myopes and persistent emmetropes differed in vitreous chamber depth, anterior chamber depth, axial length, and corneal power and produced growth curves that showed differences in the same ocular components. Persistent hyperopes were significantly different from persistent emmetropes in most components at baseline, whereas growth curve shapes were not significantly different, with the exception of anterior chamber depth (slower growth in persistent hyperopes compared with emmetropes) and axial length (lesser annual growth per year in persistent hyperopes compared with emmetropes). The growth curve shape for corneal power was different between the emmetropizing hyperopes and persistent emmetropes (increasing corneal power compared with decreasing power in emmetropes). conclusions Comparisons of growth curves between persistent emmetropes and three other refractive error groups showed that there are many similarities in the growth patterns for both the emmetropizing and persistent hyperopes, whereas the differences in growth lie mainly between the emmetropes and myopes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.04-0945

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 248

Metadata

Authors
Jones, L. A., Mitchell, G. L., Mutti, D. O., Hayes, J. R., Moeschberger, M. L., & Zadnik, K.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2005-07-01
Volume
46
Issue
7
Pages
2317
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
OpenAlex
W2134793666
Cited by
248
References
2
FWCI
2.62
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

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.