Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Patients’ characteristics, by AL subgroups.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Correlation of AL between Argos and IOL Master biometers.

Significant positive correlations were observed between the biometers (r = 0.998, P < 0.001).AL = axial length.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Bland–Altman plot of AL using Argos and IOL Master biometers.

The limits of agreement were set at ± 1.96 × standard deviation (SD). There was a significant negative correlation between the mean AL of the two biometers and the AL difference (r = -0.63, P < 0.001). AL = axial length.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Bland–Altman plot of AL using Argos and IOL Master biometers in the short-AL group.

The limits of agreement were set at ± 1.96 × SD. The values with Argos were longer than those with IOL Master in 81.3% (13/16) of eyes in the short-AL group. AL = axial length.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Bland–Altman plot of AL using Argos and IOL Master biometers in the intermediate-AL group.

The limits of agreement were set at ± 1.96 × SD. AL = axial length.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Bland–Altman plot of AL using Argos and IOL Master biometers in the long-AL group.

The limits of agreement were set at ± 1.96 × SD. The values with Argos were shorter than those with IOL Master in 87.5% (14/16) of eyes in the long-AL group. AL = axial length.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 2.

Axial length differences, by biometer.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Mean value of each tissue in subgroups by Argos.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Numbers of eyes evaluated by the two biometers, by AL subgroup.

More »

Table 4 Expand