ArticleScientific reports2026
Ocular biometry agreement among ZW-30, IOLMaster 700, and sirius in cataract patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate ocular biometry is crucial for the success of refractive cataract surgery. This study aims to assess the consistency and differences of a new biometer, the ZW-30, compared with the mainstream devices IOLMaster 700 and Sirius in patients with cataracts. A total of 307 patients with cataracts (603 eyes) were included. The anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), white-to-white (WTW) distance, pupil diameter (PD), flat K (K1), steep K (K2), corneal astigmatism (ΔK), total keratometry (TK), total corneal astigmatism (TCA), astigmatism axis, kappa angle (κ), axial length (AL), and lens thickness (LT) were measured using the ZW-30, IOLMaster 700, and Sirius. The consistency between devices was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis, the correlation of parameters was assessed using Spearman correlation analysis, and inter-device agreement equations were established. Strong correlations (r ≥ 0.7) and no statistically significant differences in mean values (p > 0.05) were found for ACD, CCT, AL, LT, and anterior corneal curvature (K1/K2) among the three devices, but the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) exceeded the clinical threshold. Total corneal parameters (TK/TCA) and κ angle showed strong correlations (r ≥ 0.5) among the three devices, with significant inter-device differences in mean values (p < 0.05) and 95%LoA exceeding the clinical threshold. Corneal diameter (WTW) had a weak correlation (r = 0.48) between the ZW-30 and Sirius, and differences in PD measurement methods led to systematic bias. The ZW-30 is consistent with the IOLMaster 700 and Sirius in terms of group trends for basic biometric parameters (ACD/CCT/anterior corneal curvature), but significant individual differences exist (95%LoA exceeding the threshold). Total corneal parameters (TK/TCA) and κ angle require cross-validation with Sirius. WTW and PD are not interchangeable between devices due to differences in measurement principles. Cross-device parameter conversion should be avoided in clinical practice to ensure the accuracy of refractive surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.