Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32501896›Full record

ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)

Update on Intraocular Lens Formulas and Calculations.

Tina Xia, Christine E Martinez, Linda M Tsai

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulae for the Yamane technique of secondary fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation in pediatric aphakia with the Artisan iris-claw lens.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cataract Surgery: A Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Cataract surgery in ocular surface disease.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2023
    Review
  20. Accuracy of newer generation intraocular lens power calculation formulas in pediatric cataract patients.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Tina XiaJohn F Hardesty MD Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis MO.
Christine E Martinez
Linda M Tsai

Funding

NIA Short Term Research Training: Students in Health Professional SchoolsT35AG049685 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Sarwat I Chaudhry, Terri R. Fried · 2016 to 2026
$804k
NIA NIH HHS T35 AG049685
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Investigators, scientists, and physicians continue to develop new methods of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation to improve the refractive accuracy after cataract surgery. To gain more accurate prediction of IOL power, vergence lens formulas have incorporated additional biometric variables, such as anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, white-to-white measurement, and even age in some algorithms. Newer formulas diverge from their classic regression and vergence-based predecessors and increasingly utilize techniques such as exact ray-tracing data, more modern regression models, and artificial intelligence. This review provides an update on recent literature comparing the commonly used third- and fourth-generation IOL formulas with newer generation formulas. Refractive outcomes with newer formulas are increasingly more and more accurate, so it is important for ophthalmologists to be aware of the various options for choosing IOL power. Historically, refractive outcomes have been especially unpredictable in patients with unusual biometry, corneal ectasia, a history of refractive surgery, and in pediatric patients. Refractive outcomes in these patient populations are improving. Improved biometry technology is also allowing for improved refractive outcomes and surgery planning convenience with the availability of newer formulas on various biometry platforms. It is crucial for surgeons to understand and utilize the most accurate formulas for their patients to provide the highest quality of care.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceLenses, IntraocularOptics and PhotonicsVisual AcuityAphakia, PostcataractBiometryHumans

Identifiers

PMID32501896
PMCPMC7299214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.