Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 349

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Novel Pachymetric Parameters Based on Corneal Tomography for Diagnosing Keratoconus

Ambrósio, Renato, Caiado, Ana Laura C., Guerra, Frederico P., Louzada, Ricardo, Roy, Abhijit Sinha, Luz, Allan, Dupps, William J., Belin, Michael W.·2011·Journal of Refractive Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe pachymetric progression indices (PPI) of the Pentacam HR (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) and the concept of relational thickness, and to test their accuracy for differentiating keratoconic and normal corneas compared with single-point thickness values. METHODS: One hundred thirteen individual eyes randomly selected from 113 normal patients and 44 eyes of 44 patients with keratoconus were studied using the Pentacam HR by acquiring central corneal thickness (CCT), thinnest point (TP), position of the TP and PPI at minimal (PPI Min) and maximal (PPI Max) meridians, and the average (PPI Ave) of all meridians. Relational thickness parameters were calculated as the ratios of TP and CCT and PPI values. Mann-Whitney U test assessed differences in groups for each variable. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for all variables and pairwise comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were noted between normal and keratoconic eyes for all parameters ( P <.001), except for horizontal position of TP ( P =.79). The best parameters, named Ambrósio’s Relational Thickness (ART), were ART-Ave (TP/PPI Ave) and ART-Max (TP/PPI Max) with areas under the ROC curves of 0.987 and 0.983, respectively. The best cutoffs were 424 μm and 339 μm for ART-Ave and ART-Max, respectively. Pachymetric progression indices and ART had a greater area under the curve than TP and CCT ( P <.001); TP (0.955) had a greater area under the curve than CCT (0.909; P =.002). CONCLUSIONS: Tomographic-derived pachymetric parameters were better able to differentiate normal and keratoconic corneas than single-point pachymetric measurements. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of tomography in identifing early forms of ectasia as well as ectasia risk among LASIK candidates.

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 · 10.3928/1081597x-20110721-01

Cites

17 of 17 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

Show all 17 references

Metadata

Authors
Ambrósio, R., Caiado, A. L. C., Guerra, F. P., Louzada, R., Roy, A. S., Luz, A., Dupps, W. J., & Belin, M. W.
Venue
Journal of Refractive Surgery
Publisher
SLACK, Inc.
Published
2011-10
Volume
27
Issue
10
Pages
753-758
ISSN
  • 1042-962X (ISSN-L)
  • 1081-597X
OpenAlex
W2016986050
Cited by
349
References
17
FWCI
15.40
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: Novel Pachymetric Parameters Based on Corneal Tomography for Diagnosing Keratoconus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3928/1081597x-20110721-01
The paper
Ambrósio, R., Caiado, A. L. C., Guerra, F. P., Louzada, R., Roy, A. S., Luz, A., Dupps, W. J., & Belin, M. W. (2011). Novel Pachymetric Parameters Based on Corneal Tomography for Diagnosing Keratoconus. Journal of Refractive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597x-20110721-01

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.