Objective To compare the differences of corneal keratometry and corneal astigmatism measured by Len?star LS900 and KR-1 auto-refractor of age-related cataract. Methods Seventy-six patients with cataract (76 eyes) were in?cluded in this study. Flat keratometry (K1), steep keratometry (K2), mean keratometry (Km) and astigmatism were measured before operation by Lenstar LS900 and KR-1 auto-refractor. The parameters of astigmatism were transformed into J0 and J45 by Fourier vector transform, and which was compared. Results Values of K1, K2, Km, J0 and J45 were (43.960±1.440) D, (44.901±1.319)D, (44.430±1.336)D, 0.043±0.402 and 0.017±0.425 measured by Lenstar LS900, respectively, and which measured by KR-1 auto-refractor were (44.007 ± 1.400)D, (44.859 ± 1.338)D, (44.433 ± 1.330)D,-0.058 ± 0.322 and 0.031 ± 0.419, respectively. There was no statistical difference between these values measured by two instruments ( P>0.05). The Bland-Altman plots showed that two devices had coincident results for corneal parameters. Conclusion Lenstar LS900 and KR-1 auto-refractor can be applied in the measurement of corneal astigmatism of age-related cataract before surgery.

There are no standard diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer′s disease (AD) in China. The copied international criteria has led to a high rate of missed diagnosis due to issues such as translation and cultural discrepancy. Under the principles of semantic equivalence, content equivalence and performance equivalence, the research group of Alzheimer′s Disease Chinese (ADC) adopted several effective methods, such as two-way translation, content conversion, performance evaluation, etc. to systematically study the cognitive, behavioral, functional, and general assessment techniques in dementia screening and diagnosis, as well as their screening thresholds and diagnostic values. We also established a dementia screening and assessment framework in clinical practice through systematic reviews and group consensus. It has improved the early diagnosis rate of dementia in China, been accepted by home and abroad academic institutions, which is of great significance for early diagnosis and treatment of dementia.

For lack of cognitive screening standard system and controversy over the value of imaging for cerebrovascular diseases in China, the research group of Alzheimer′s Disease Chinese (ADC) studied the knowledge of neuropsychology, neuroimaging and clinical neurology, systematically reviewed the diagnostic techniques such as memory, language, visuospatial, executive, function, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cerebrovascular diseases, and their optimal threshold and diagnostic value for vascular dementia. Via a consensus meeting, the diagnostic guidelines and practical screening process are combined to construct a framework in Chinese population, which is based on the objective evidence of medical history and clinical evaluation. The diagnosis of vascular dementia is supported by imaging evidence of cerebrovascular diseases and differentiates from other causes of dementia or comorbidities. This consensus is applicable to medical units in China, and is of great significance for early detection, early diagnosis and early treatment of vascular dementia.

Criteria for diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is not available in China.The international criteria is not a proper choice due to issues such as translation and lead to low diagnostic rate and high rate of missed diagnosis.The research group of Alzheimer's Disease Chinese (ADC) reviewed knowledge and techniques in neuropsychology,neuroimaging,molecular biology,and clinical neurology,and systematically studied the detection techniques such as memory,language,visuospatial,executive function,and medial temporal lobe visual scores on MRI,and their optimal threshold and diagnostic value for the diagnosis of AD.Through a systematic review and consensus meeting,a diagnostic framework for screeningAD in the Chinese population was established.Among these methods,an operational standard for clinical pathology models increased the diagnostic sensitivity by 15％.The sensitivity and specificity of screening memory impairment increased by 18.1％ and 11.6％,respectively.The sensitivity of screening medialtemporal lobe atrophy increased by 24.5％ and missed diagnosis was decreased by 34.5％.An operational standard for clinical biology models,incorporating the latest molecular imaging and molecular biology techniques,has enabled the early diagnosis of AD in China.The framework combines a principled diagnostic guideline with an operational screening protocol,which is applicable to all clinical settings and of great significance for the early detection,early diagnosis and early treatment of AD.

Objective:To compare the difference and consistency of anterior corneal surface and total corneal refractive power and astigmatism measured by CASIA2, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam in patients with age-related cataract.Methods:A diagnostic test was conducted.Two-hundred patients (200 eyes) with age-related cataract were enrolled in Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital from March to April 2021.The steep keratometry (Ks), flat keratometry (Kf), mean keratometry (Km), degree and axis of astigmatism of the anterior and the total corneal surface of patients were measured by CASIA2, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam, respectively.The astigmatism was transformed into J0 and J45 by Fourier transform formula.The differences and correlation of the measurements obtained with the three instruments were analyzed by one-way repeated measures analysis of variance and Pearson correlation analysis.The consistency was evaluated by Bland-Altman test.This study adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki.The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital (No.2021KY-07).Results:There were statistically significant differences in anterior corneal surface Kf and J0 measured by the three instruments ( F=18.563, 16.172; both at P=0.001). The Kf measured by CASIA2 was significantly higher than that measured by IOLMaster 700, and the J0 measured by IOLMaster 700 was significantly higher than that measured by Pentacam (both at P<0.05). There were statistically significant differences in total corneal Ks, Kf, Km and J0 measured by the three instruments, which from IOLMaster 700 were the largest, followed by CASIA2, then Pentacam ( F=1 300.447, 1 274.117, 1 609.713, 10.372; all at P=0.001). Pearson correlation analysis showed that the corneal refractive power measured by the three instruments was highly correlated (all at r>0.935, P<0.01), and the correlation of astigmatism values was weaker than the corneal refractive power ( r=0.623-0.908, all at P<0.01). Bland-Altman analysis showed that the three instruments had good consistency in measuring the anterior corneal surface refractive power, anterior corneal surface astigmatism and total corneal astigmatism, which were clinically acceptable, while the consistency of total corneal refractive power measurement was poor.The difference in measuring total corneal refractive power was large between IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam, and relatively small between CASIA2 and Pentacam. Conclusions:The consistency of CASIA2, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam is good in measuring the anterior corneal surface refractive power of patients with age-related cataract, which can be substitutable, but poor in measuring the total corneal refractive power.The total corneal refractive power measurement from IOLMaster700 is the largest, the smallest from Pentacam, which is not recommended to be clinically exchangeable.