ArticleClinical optometry2020
Visual Acuity and Refractive Error Improvement in Keratoconic Patients: A Low-Income Context Management Perspective.
Article in Clinical optometry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective pilot randomized controlled study of mini-scleral lenses versus rigid gas permeable lenses in irregular cornea with dry eye.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Factors influencing clinical research participation in ophthalmology: a mixed-methods study in keratoconus.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Assessing Access to and Utilization of the Advanced Diagnostic and Management Equipment for Early Keratoconus in Public and Private Healthcare Facilities Across Nyanza and Western Kenya.Clinical optometry · 2025Article
- Effects of Custom-Designed Soft Contact Lenses on Irregular Astigmatism Correction in Patients with Keratoconus.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVisual acuity (VA) and refractive error (RE) remain important parameters in the management of keratoconic (KC) patients. Despite rapid amelioration in capacity of diagnostic equipment, these remain inaccessible to the majority of practitioners in low-income countries. Notwithstanding limitations, practitioners are expected to utilize existing resources to satisfactorily manage their increasing numbers of keratoconic patients. PURPOSE: To determine the changes in visual acuity and refractive errors with diagnostic and management options available in low-income contexts.
methodsA descriptive, retrospective chart analysis of medical records dating back 5 years was employed in this study. Records of patients prescribed with corneal rigid gas permeable (RGP) and scleral lenses were analyzed. Data on age, gender, stage of keratoconus, pre-, and post-visual acuities and refractive errors, mode of correction and lens parameters were evaluated.
resultsA total of 124 medical records were analyzed. Males comprised 58.9% and females 41.1% of the total sample, with a mean age 20.86 ± 9.50 years. The mean unaided VA in logMAR notation was 1.0±0.19, while corrected VA was 0.18±0.17. There was a significant improvement (
conclusionSignificantly improved visual acuity and refractive error status were achieved with all KC patients. Despite the diagnostic equipment and contact lenses design limitations, practitioners in low-income contexts can fit the relatively more affordable corneal RGP lenses to positively impact the daily living experiences of their KC patients.
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.