Variations in Lens Thickness Affecting the Anterior Chamber Length and Their Potential Measurement Using a Biometer

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author investigates the correlation of axial length in the eyes and the application of biometric measurements in cataract surgery. The paper focuses on the dynamic changes in lens thickness during rest and accommodation, with particular emphasis on in-depth research in age-related presbyopia. The study aims to assess the feasibility of a specialized device to accurately measure changes in lens thickness under different conditions, highlighting the crucial importance of understanding ocular dynamics for more precise diagnoses and surgical techniques.

 

1.       In the Abstract, this work mentions that this exploration aims to enhance our understanding of eye dynamics, contributing to more precise diagnostics and surgical techniques. It emphasizes the importance of staying at the forefront of biometric research, especially given the potential impact of emerging technologies on ophthalmology. However, Figures 1-3 insufficiently support these claims. Please focus on the content of Figures 1-3.

2.       Please provide literature to support paragraphs 1-2 in the Introduction.

3.       Adjust the caption format for Figures 1-3 to ensure consistency. Include details on the configurations of Figure 3, as these dimensions are crucial for this study.

4.       More related advances on dynamic monitoring (VIEW. 2022, 3, 20220027) can be included.

5.       Change "2. Description" to "2. Results." The manuscript should be corrected.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Can be improved.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 1,

 

On behalf of our research team, we appreciate your insightful comments and suggestions regarding our manuscript. Based on your recommendations, we have made the following revisions:

Figures 1-3 Improvement: I have revised Figures 1-3 to better support the claims made in the abstract. The figures now include more detailed visual data and annotations to clearly illustrate the dynamics of the eye.

Introduction Literature Support: I have added relevant literature to paragraphs 1-2 of the Introduction. This includes recent studies and findings that support our understanding of axial length correlations in the eye and the application of biometric measurements in cataract surgery, providing a stronger theoretical foundation for the study.

Consistency of Figure Captions: The captions for Figures 1-3 were standardized to ensure consistency throughout the paper. For Figure 3 in particular, I have added detailed descriptions of the configurations to emphasize their relevance and importance in the context of this study.

Correct section title: The title of section "2. Description" has been changed to "2. Results" to better reflect the content of the manuscript. I have also reviewed the manuscript to correct any inconsistencies and ensure that the section accurately reflects the findings and results of the study.

Thank you for your suggestion to include additional literature on dynamic monitoring, specifically referencing the paper in VIEW. 2022, 3, 20220027. After thorough deliberation within our research team, we have decided that incorporating this particular study may not be directly relevant to the primary focus of our current research, which is centered on investigating the changes in lens thickness and their implications in ocular biometry measurements.

Our study is meticulously focused on understanding the dynamics of lens thickness variation and its impact on biometric assessments in the eye, particularly in the context of age-related changes and their implications in ophthalmic diagnostics and treatment strategies. While we recognize the value and relevance of advancements in dynamic monitoring, the suggested paper explores broader aspects that, although important, do not align closely with the specific aims and scope of our investigation. I appreciate your thorough review and hope that these revisions meet the journal's standards for publication.

We would like to inform you that we have conducted a thorough and meticulous linguistic review of our manuscript. This process included not only detailed grammar and spelling corrections, but also a careful review of technical terminology and writing style to ensure clarity and accuracy in the communication of our findings. We trust that these improvements will contribute significantly to the quality and readability of the article.

I welcome any further suggestions or comments you may have.

Best regards,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors presented a study aimed at eliminating limitations in ocular biometrics, especially when measuring dynamic changes in lens thickness. The authors claim that the introduction of an objective device for measuring accommodation can be a significant step towards improving the accuracy and completeness of biometric measurements. It is proposed that this device will not only increase the accuracy of accommodation measurements, but also potentially affect how various eye diseases are diagnosed and treated.The authors claim that the ability to measure dynamic changes in the thickness of the lens can give a new idea about age-related presbyopia and other accommodation disorders.

There is no apparent reason to doubt the need for further research in this direction, and therefore the article should be published in the journal of Photonics.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 2,

 

We are very grateful for your positive review of our manuscript and your recommendation for publication in the Journal of Photonics. Your recognition of the potential impact of our study on the advancement of ocular biometry, particularly the measurement of dynamic changes in lens thickness, is very encouraging.

We share your view that the introduction of an objective device to measure accommodation represents a significant step forward in improving the accuracy and comprehensiveness of biometric measurements. Our team firmly believes that this innovation not only increases the accuracy of accommodation measurements, but also has the potential to transform the diagnosis and treatment of various eye diseases.

Their recognition of the importance of measuring dynamic changes in lens thickness and its implications for understanding age-related presbyopia and other accommodative disorders aligns with the core goals of our research. We are optimistic that our findings will provide valuable insights into this area and stimulate further research in this direction.

We appreciate your support and the opportunity to contribute to the Journal of Photonics. We are committed to continuing our research efforts in this important area of ophthalmology and look forward to potentially collaborating with the journal on future publications.

We would like to inform you that we have conducted a thorough and meticulous linguistic review of our manuscript. This process included not only detailed grammar and spelling corrections, but also a careful review of technical terminology and writing style to ensure clarity and accuracy in the communication of our findings. We trust that these improvements will contribute significantly to the quality and readability of the article.

 

Thank you.

Sincerely.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the current manuscript, the authors aimed to assess the feasibility of incorporating an additional device into the biometric process to accurately account for changes in the crystalline lens during accommodation periods. The manuscript is clear and exhibits a well-organized structure that enhances readability. Enclosed are brief comments that could prove beneficial in refining certain aspects of the manuscript.

Lines 45-46: Consider including references for further support (PMID: 24679835, PMID: 35624303).

Lines 46-47: Provide a reference for additional context (PMID: 33685443).

Lines 53-55: Strengthen your argument by citing relevant sources (PMID: 33685443, PMID: 33913906, PMID: 37897567).

Lines 66-68: Support your statements with pertinent references (PMID: 37402231, PMID: 35265416, PMID: 37897567, PMID: 37194016).

Line 111: Consider why uppercase is used here; is there a specific reason for it?

Lines 60 vs. 157: Ensure consistency in the usage of acronyms, aligning them with how they were introduced in the introduction section.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 3,

 

We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your thorough review and valuable suggestions for improving our manuscript. We are pleased to know that the clarity and structure of the document were well received.

We have taken note of each of your recommendations and are implementing them as follows:

Lines 45-46: We will include the suggested references (PMID: 24679835, PMID: 35624303) to provide additional support and strengthen our claims in this section of the manuscript.

Lines 46-47: We will add the reference (PMID: 33685443) to provide more detailed context and enrich the discussion in this part of the manuscript.

Lines 53-55: We will strengthen our argument by citing the recommended sources (PMID: 33685443, PMID: 33913906, PMID: 37897567), which will help to solidify the foundations of our study.

Lines 66-68: Following your advice, we will support our statements with the appropriate references (PMID: 37402231, PMID: 35265416, PMID: 37897567, PMID: 37194016) to ensure a solid and credible foundation for our conclusions.

Line 111: The original reason for using capital letters in this part of the text was to emphasize the main goal of our project. However, after reviewing your comment and considering the norms of style and coherence in academic writing, we have decided to correct it. We have now changed this section to be in lowercase, thus ensuring greater uniformity and professionalism throughout the document.

Lines 60 versus 157: We commit to ensuring consistency in the use of acronyms throughout the text, making sure they are consistent with the way they were introduced in the Introduction section to maintain clarity and uniformity.

Thank you again for your enriching contribution to our work. Your comments and recommendations are of great value to us, and we are confident that these changes will significantly improve the quality of our manuscript.

Best regards,