FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3210833796> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3210833796 endingPage "243" @default.
• W3210833796 startingPage "241" @default.
• W3210833796 abstract "La retinoscopia, como técnica objetiva de evaluación del estado refractivo, es especialmente útil en la edad infantil. La técnica de Mohindra (RM) es una alternativa para aquellos pacientes en los que no es viable la retinoscopia mediante ciclopléjico (RC). En el presente estudio se pretende comparar ambas técnicas para determinar su correlación y concordancia.Se seleccionaron a 47 niños y niñas con edades comprendidas entre los 3 y 11 años. Se determinó para ambos ojos la refracción con RM y RC (ciclopentolato 1%), así como con autorefractómetro (AR). Se compararon los resultados de las tres técnicas y se calculó el factor de corrección correspondiente para equiparar RM con RC.Se encontraron diferencias significativas entre RM y RC (mediana de -0,42 D; p< 0,001) y entre RM y AR (mediana de -0,42 D; p = 0,008), pero no entre RC y AR (mediana de 0,00 D; p = 0,758). La correlación entre RM y RC fue excelente (rho = 0,846; p< 0,001) pero el test de Bland-Altman evidenció una mayor discrepancia entre técnicas a medida que aumentaba la refracción hipermetrópica, con un factor de corrección de RC = 1,15 RM + 0,42.La técnica de Mohindra se puede considerar como una alternativa válida a la retinoscopía mediante ciclopléjico en pacientes en edad escolar y preescolar, con una buena correlación entre ambas técnicas, pero con menor concordancia en hipermetropías elevadas.As an objective technique to assess refractive status, retinoscopy is particularly useful in children. The Mohindra technique (RM) is an alternative for those patients not good candidates for cycloplegic retinoscopy (RC). The aim of the present research was to compare both techniques and to determine the correlation and agreement of their measurements.A total of 47 boys and girls of ages ranging from 3 to 11 years old were included in the study. Cycloplegic (cyclopentolate 1%) and Mohindra retinoscopy were conducted in both eyes, and refraction was also assessed with an autorefractometre (AR). The results from the three techniques were compared and a correction factor between RM and RC was calculated.Statistically significant differences were found between RM and RC (median of -0.42 D; p< 0.001) and between RM and AR (median of -0.42 D; p = 0.008), but not between RC and AR (median of 0.00 D; p = 0.758). A strong correlation was found between RM and RC (rho = 0.846; p< 0.001), although the Bland-Altman test revealed a larger difference between these techniques in patients with larger hyperopic refractive errors, with a correction factor of RC = 1.15 RM + 0.42.The Mohindra technique may be considered a valid alternative to cycloplegic retinoscopy in patients of young age, with a good correlation between both techniques, albeit less agreement in patients with high hyperopic refractions." @default.
• W3210833796 created "2021-11-08" @default.
• W3210833796 creator A5061822312 @default.
• W3210833796 creator A5070729395 @default.
• W3210833796 creator A5075551141 @default.
• W3210833796 date "2022-05-01" @default.
• W3210833796 modified "2023-10-05" @default.
• W3210833796 title "Cribado de retinotoxicidad secundaria a hidroxicloroquina: recomendaciones actuales y perspectivas futuras" @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2026206682 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2134233670 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2792883409 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2805041785 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2889042102 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2891187979 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W2893434268 @default.
• W3210833796 cites W3120364062 @default.
• W3210833796 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oftal.2021.09.001" @default.
• W3210833796 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W3210833796 type Work @default.
• W3210833796 sameAs 3210833796 @default.
• W3210833796 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3210833796 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3210833796 hasAuthorship W3210833796A5061822312 @default.
• W3210833796 hasAuthorship W3210833796A5070729395 @default.
• W3210833796 hasAuthorship W3210833796A5075551141 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConcept C15708023 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConceptScore W3210833796C121332964 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConceptScore W3210833796C138885662 @default.
• W3210833796 hasConceptScore W3210833796C15708023 @default.
• W3210833796 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W3210833796 hasLocation W32108337961 @default.
• W3210833796 hasOpenAccess W3210833796 @default.
• W3210833796 hasPrimaryLocation W32108337961 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2609344916 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2740647293 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2780307509 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2935759653 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W4210390885 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W59019880 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2308060692 @default.
• W3210833796 hasRelatedWork W2478882070 @default.
• W3210833796 hasVolume "97" @default.
• W3210833796 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3210833796 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3210833796 magId "3210833796" @default.
• W3210833796 workType "article" @default.