{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028548123980424143, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024469820554649267, 'mean_word_length': 5.561497326203209, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 3, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of two infrared autorefractors in pseudophakia

We investigated the viability of using an objective infrared autorefractor to identify high corneal astigmatism (>3.00D) in a pseudophakic population. The eyes of 91 patients, who had recently undergone cataract extraction and intraocular lens implanation, were refracted manually and using two infrared autorefractors, a Canon RK‐1 and a Nikon NR‐2000. Autorefractor measurements were repeated to provide estimates of reliability for each instrument. LogMAR visual acuities were also recorded with both the manual and autorefractor corrections. Approximately 75% of repeal autorefractor measurements were within 0.50 D of the initial readings, and about 75% of measurements were within 1.00 D of the manual refractions. Visual acuities with manual corrections were, on average, one line better than with autorefractor corrections. By validating the auto refractors against manual refraction, the efficiency of the autorefractors for detecting astigmatism > 3.00 D was calculated. Setting the cut‐off criterion to ensure high sensitivity (95%), so that almost all patients with >100D were detected, resulted in both instruments having a poor specificity of about 40%.