Gender differences in refraction prediction error of five formulas for cataract surgery
dc.contributor.author | Zhang, Yibing | |
dc.contributor.author | Li, Tingyang | |
dc.contributor.author | Reddy, Aparna | |
dc.contributor.author | Nallasamy, Nambi | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-10T18:13:59Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-10T18:13:59Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-04-21 | |
dc.identifier.citation | BMC Ophthalmology. 2021 Apr 21;21(1):183 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-021-01950-2 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/173596 | en |
dc.description.abstract | Abstract Objectives To evaluate gender differences in optical biometry measurements and lens power calculations. Methods Eight thousand four hundred thirty-one eyes of five thousand five hundred nineteen patients who underwent cataract surgery at University of Michigan’s Kellogg Eye Center were included in this retrospective study. Data including age, gender, optical biometry, postoperative refraction, implanted intraocular lens (IOL) power, and IOL formula refraction predictions were gathered and/or calculated utilizing the Sight Outcomes Research Collaborative (SOURCE) database and analyzed. Results There was a statistical difference between every optical biometry measure between genders. Despite lens constant optimization, mean signed prediction errors (SPEs) of modern IOL formulas differed significantly between genders, with predictions skewed more hyperopic for males and myopic for females for all 5 of the modern IOL formulas tested. Optimization of lens constants by gender significantly decreased prediction error for 2 of the 5 modern IOL formulas tested. Conclusions Gender was found to be an independent predictor of refraction prediction error for all 5 formulas studied. Optimization of lens constants by gender can decrease refraction prediction error for certain modern IOL formulas. | |
dc.title | Gender differences in refraction prediction error of five formulas for cataract surgery | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/173596/1/12886_2021_Article_1950.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | https://dx.doi.org/10.7302/5327 | |
dc.language.rfc3066 | en | |
dc.rights.holder | The Author(s) | |
dc.date.updated | 2022-08-10T18:13:59Z | |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.