ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Prevalence and Risk Factors for Keratoconus in Young Adults Assessed with Tomography and Corneal Biomechanics: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the prevalence of keratoconus (KC) and associated risk factors in a previously undiagnosed population at a Brazilian university hospital, using advanced tomographic and biomechanical tools. Design: A prospective, cross-sectional observational study. Methods: A total of 521 participants (1041 eyes) from the staff and students of Gaffrée and Guinle University Hospital, Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro, were examined using corneal tomography (Pentacam AXL; Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) and biomechanical analysis (Corvis ST; Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH). Exclusion criteria included self-reported KC, prior corneal surgery, known corneal pathology, and suspected contact lens warpage. A structured questionnaire assessing demographics, eye-rubbing habits, and family history was administered to all participants before diagnostic examinations. A single experienced examiner performed subjective topometric map evaluations. Objective parameters included the Tomographic and Biomechanical Index version 2 (TBIv2), Corneal Biomechanical Index (CBI), Pentacam Random Forest Index, Belin-Ambrósio Deviation Index, version 3 (BAD-Dv3), and topographic KC classification. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests, odds ratios (ORs), and relative risks (RRs). All prevalence rates are reported per eye. Results: Subjectively, 36.8% of eyes were classified as normal, 31.4% with regular astigmatism, and 5.8% as ectatic or ectasia-suspect (including 4.2% suspected KC, 1.0% KC, and 0.5% pellucid marginal degeneration). Contact lens warpage (15.1%) and other irregular patterns (10.9%) were also noted. Objectively, 5.86% had altered topographic KC classification, 13.16% had pachymetry <500 μm, 20.6% showed Ambrósio relational thickness maximum <385, 10.9% had BAD-Dv3 ≥1.9, 26.9% had CBI ≥0.5, and 32.7% had TBIv2 ≥0.43, with 13.6% ≥0.8. Eye rubbing was significantly associated with KC (OR 20.34; RR 9.79). Conclusions: This study revealed a notable prevalence of undiagnosed clinical and subclinical KC, with eye rubbing as a strong behavioral risk factor. Multimodal diagnostics allowed more precise characterization of corneal biomechanical susceptibility. The clinical findings support the importance of early screening and behavioral education. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.