ArticleScience advances2019
Autofocals: Evaluating gaze-contingent eyeglasses for presbyopes.
Article in Science advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of focus-tunable presbyopia correction lenses operated using gaze-tracking and LIDAR.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- VisionaryVR: An Optical Simulation Tool for Evaluating and Optimizing Vision Correction Solutions in Virtual Reality.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Vision-driven metasurfaces for perception enhancement.Nature communications · 2024Article
- ChromaCorrect: prescription correction in virtual reality headsets through perceptual guidance.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a liquid membrane-based tunable lens and a solid-state LIDAR camera feedback system for presbyopia.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- Accessibility challenges of e-commerce websites.PeerJ. Computer science · 2022Article
- Applications of augmented reality in ophthalmology [Invited].Biomedical optics express · 2021Review
- Portable device for presbyopia correction with optoelectronic lenses driven by pupil response.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As humans age, they gradually lose the ability to accommodate, or refocus, to near distances because of the stiffening of the crystalline lens. This condition, known as presbyopia, affects nearly 20% of people worldwide. We design and build a new presbyopia correction, autofocals, to externally mimic the natural accommodation response, combining eye tracker and depth sensor data to automatically drive focus-tunable lenses. We evaluated 19 users on visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and a refocusing task. Autofocals exhibit better visual acuity when compared to monovision and progressive lenses while maintaining similar contrast sensitivity. On the refocusing task, autofocals are faster and, compared to progressives, also significantly more accurate. In a separate study, a majority of 23 of 37 users ranked autofocals as the best correction in terms of ease of refocusing. Our work demonstrates the superiority of autofocals over current forms of presbyopia correction and could affect the lives of millions.
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.