Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30686953›Full record

Trial reportJournal of Korean medical science2019

Objective Verification of Physiologic Changes during Accommodation under Binocular, Monocular, and Pinhole Conditions.

Honghyun Park, In Ki Park, Jae-Ho Shin, Yeoun Sook Chun

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of Korean medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03557346 (Objective Verification of Physiologic Changes During Accommodation Under Binocular, Monocular, and Pinhole Conditions), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03557346 completednot on this map

Objective Verification of Physiologic Changes During Accommodation Under Binocular, Monocular, and Pinhole Conditions

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorChung-Ang University HospitalRan2017 to 2017Enrolled64ConditionsAccommodationArmsthe WAM-5500 binocular autorefractor/keratometer (Grand Seiko Co. Ltd., Hiroshima, Japan)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Honghyun ParkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5847-4506
In Ki ParkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1266-1693
Jae-Ho ShinDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4234-6109
Yeoun Sook ChunDepartment of Ophthalmology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-8185
Chung-Ang University Hospital · KRKyung Hee University · KRKyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo objectively investigate accommodative response to various refractive stimuli in subjects with normal accommodation.

methodsThis prospective, non-randomized clinical trial included 64 eyes of 32 subjects with a mean spherical equivalent -1.4 diopters (D). We evaluated changes in accommodative power, pupil diameter, astigmatic value, and axis when visual stimuli were applied to binocular, monocular (dominant eye, non-dominant eye, ipsilateral, and contralateral), and pinhole conditions. Visual stimuli were given at 0.25 D (4 m), 2 D (50 cm), 3 D (33 cm), and 4 D (25 cm) and accommodative response was evaluated using open view binocular autorefractor/keratometer.

resultsThe accommodative response to binocular stimulus was 90.9% of the actual refractive stimulus, while that of the monocular stimulus was 84.6%. The binocular stimulus induced a smaller pupil diameter than did the monocular stimulus. There was no difference in accommodative response between the dominant eye and non-dominant eye or between ipsilateral and contralateral stimuli. As the refractive stimuli became stronger, the absolute astigmatic value increased and the direction of the astigmatism axis became more horizontal. Pinhole glasses required 10%-15% less accommodative power compared with the monocular condition.

conclusionBinocular stimuli enable more precise and effective accommodation than do monocular stimuli. Accommodative response is composed of 90% true accommodation and 10% pseudo-accommodation, and the refractive stimulus in one eye affects the contralateral eye to the same extent. This should be taken into account when developing guidelines for wearing smart glasses while driving, as visual stimulation is applied to only one eye, but far distance attention is constantly needed.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03557346.

Indexed as

Vision, BinocularVision, MonocularAccommodation, OcularAdultAnisocoriaFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationProspective StudiesRefractive ErrorsVisual AcuityYoung AdultAccommodationAstigmatismPinholePupil Diameter

Identifiers

PMID30686953
PMCPMC6345635
OpenAlexW2911239546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.