ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2019
Comparison of the impact of nesofilcon A hydrogel contact lens on the ocular surface and the comfort of presbyopic and non-presbyopic wearers.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of the Osmoprotective Effects of Daily Disposable Contact Lens Packaging Solutions on Human Corneal Epithelial Cells.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparison of the Pre-Lens Tear Film Stability and Visual Performance of a Novel and Two Other Daily Disposable Contact Lenses in Healthcare Professionals Wearing Facial Masks for Prolonged Time.Clinical optometry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess and compare the impact of a daily disposable contact lens (CL) with high water content on the ocular surface and comfort of the presbyopic and non-presbyopic population after one day of use.
methodsTotally 20 presbyopes and 30 non-presbyopes non-contact wearers were fitted with nesofilcon A CLs. CL thickness was measured to assess material stability during daily wear, and ocular surface parameters were also assessed. Optical quality was analyzed for all cases. In addition, CL comfort was rated.
resultsNo significant differences were found in CL thickness, tear film osmolarity, average tear break-up time, bulbar redness, central corneal thickness, corneal volume, root-mean-square of higher-order aberrations (RMS of HOAs) and vertical and horizontal coma, either as a function of the group or time of use. A significant decrease in tear meniscus height and first break-up of the tear film was found in the presbyopic group (
conclusionThis study evidence that the behavior of the daily disposable CL with high water content seems to be stable during the day of use. Ocular parameters measured during wear show that CL behavior is the same for presbyopes and non-presbyopes, being more uncomfortable for presbyopes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.