ArticleScientific reports2020
Comparison of visual performance between monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses of the same material and basic design.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus lenses and a blend approach of extended depth of focus lenses and bifocal lenses in cataract patients.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Trial
- Contrast Sensitivity Impairment Is Associated With Limitations of Physical Functioning and Activities of Daily Living Among Older Adults.Journal of aging and health · 2026Article
- One-year prospective study of a HEMA-based hydrophobic acrylic trifocal IOL (Clareon PanOptix): visual performance, patient-reported outcomes, and optic clarity.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparison of visual performance between monofocal and rotationally asymmetric refractive intraocular lenses.PloS one · 2025Article
- Comparison of visual outcomes in patients with cataracts and high myopia after implantation of a zonal refractive multifocal or diffractive bifocal intraocular lens.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparative visual performance of ultraviolet light-filtering and violet light-filtering monofocal intraocular lenses of the same material and basic design.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of visual performance between diffractive bifocal and diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- [Myopic multifocal duet implantation for the correction of presbyopia and myopia].Die Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- Comparison of visual performance between bifocal and extended-depth-of-focus intraocular lenses.PloS one · 2023Article
- Comparative visual performance of diffractive bifocal and rotationally asymmetric refractive intraocular lenses.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Geometric-phase intraocular lenses with multifocality.Light, science & applications · 2022Article
- Comparative analysis of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens that combines extended depth-of-focus and bifocal profiles with a standard monofocal intraocular lens.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Analysis of Korean Retinal Specialists' Opinions on Implanting Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Eyes with Underlying Retinal Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the visual performance of a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) (ZCB00) and a multifocal IOL (ZMB00) of the same material and basic design, we evaluated postoperative parameters at 10 weeks after the last surgery in cataract patients who underwent bilateral ZCB00 or ZMB00 implantation from December 13, 2010, to July 29, 2019, with the right and left lenses implanted within 3 months of each other. The study enrolled 2,230 eyes of 1,115 patients. The monofocal group comprised 904 eyes of 452 patients (72.3 ± 6.8 years; females/males, 268/184), and the multifocal group comprised 1,326 eyes of 663 patients (67.0 ± 7.8 years; females/males, 518/145). Contrast sensitivity (4.0/2.5/1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees), contrast sensitivity with glare (1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees), and the VFQ-25 score for driving at night were significantly better in the monofocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test). Uncorrected intermediate/near visual acuity and near spectacle independence were significantly better in the multifocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test). The two IOL groups had different characteristics in terms of contrast sensitivity, night-time driving, uncorrected intermediate/near visual acuity and near spectacle independence.
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.