Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 502

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index

Open access
Vinciguerra, Riccardo, Ambrósio, Renato, Elsheikh, Ahmed, Roberts, Cynthia J., Lopes, Bernardo, Morenghi, Emanuela, Azzolini, Claudio, Vinciguerra, Paolo·2016·Journal of Refractive Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of a new combined biomechanical index called the Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) based on corneal thickness profile and deformation parameters to separate normal from keratoconic patients. METHODS: Six hundred fifty-eight patients (329 eyes in each database) were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Patients from two clinics located on different continents were selected to test the capability of the CBI to separate healthy and keratoconic eyes in more than one ethnic group using the Corvis ST (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). Logistic regression was employed to determine, based on Database 1 as the development dataset, the optimal combination of parameters to accurately separate normal from keratoconic eyes. The CBI was subsequently independently validated on Database 2. RESULTS: The CBI included several dynamic corneal response parameters: deformation amplitude ratio at 1 and 2 mm, applanation 1 velocity, standard deviation of deformation amplitude at highest concavity, Ambrósio's Relational Thickness to the horizontal profile, and a novel stiffness parameter. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the training database showed an area under the curve of 0.983. With a cut-off value of 0.5, 98.2% of the cases were correctly classified with 100% specificity and 94.1% sensitivity. In the validation dataset, the same cut-off point correctly classified 98.8% of the cases with 98.4% specificity and 100% sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: The CBI was shown to be highly sensitive and specific to separate healthy from keratoconic eyes. The presence of an external validation dataset confirms this finding and suggests the possible use of the CBI in everyday clinical practice to aid in the diagnosis of keratoconus. [ J Refract Surg. 2016;32(12):803–810.]

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-20160629-01

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.

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

Cited by

See all 502

Metadata

Authors
Vinciguerra, R., Ambrósio, R., Elsheikh, A., Roberts, C. J., Lopes, B., Morenghi, E., Azzolini, C., & Vinciguerra, P.
Venue
Journal of Refractive Surgery
Publisher
SLACK, Inc.
Published
2016-12
Volume
32
Issue
12
Pages
803-810
ISSN
  • 1042-962X (ISSN-L)
  • 1081-597X
OpenAlex
W2559749448
Cited by
502
References
0
FWCI
24.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3928/1081597x-20160629-01
The paper
Vinciguerra, R., Ambrósio, R., Elsheikh, A., Roberts, C. J., Lopes, B., Morenghi, E., Azzolini, C., & Vinciguerra, P. (2016). Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index. Journal of Refractive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597x-20160629-01

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.