ArticleTrials2022
Implantable collamer lens implantation (ICL) versus small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in low to moderate myopia: study protocol for a randomized, non-inferiority trial.
Article in Trials, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toric versus Standard Implantable Collamer Lens Implantation for Low Myopic Astigmatism: A 12-Month Retrospective Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Predicting Intraocular Collamer Lens Vault in Myopic Patients With Shallow Anterior Chamber Using FedEYE Platform and ChatGPT.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Subjective and objective changes in visual quality after implantable collamer lens implantation for myopia.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundImplantable collamer lens implantation (ICL) is a form of 'foldable' posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens refractive surgery that generally does not impair cornea and natural accommodation. The potential advantages of the ICL over keratorefractive laser procedures include less induction of higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and enhanced retinal image magnification. On the other hand, small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), currently, one of the most popular refractive surgery procedures, also offers excellent visual outcomes, particularly for eyes with low to moderate amounts of myopia. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether ICL/TICL (toric ICL) is comparable to SMILE for low to moderate myopia in terms of refractive outcomes at 3 and 18 months post-operatively. METHODS/
designThis is a prospective randomized study. A total of 300 participants will be randomized into two groups, the ICL/TICL group and SMILE group. Eligible participants with spherical equivalent (SE) less than - 6.0 diopter (D) will be recruited. Following randomization, participants will be followed at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. The primary outcome is the refractive predictability at every postoperative point after surgery, which is the proportion of the number of eyes achieving a postoperative SE within ± 0.5 D and ± 1.0 D of the intended target. Secondary outcome parameters include visual acuity, refraction, adverse events, and quality of vision measurements. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide information on whether ICL has comparable, if not superior, refractive outcomes compared to the established SMILE for low to moderate myopia, thus providing evidence for translation into clinical practice.
trial registrationChinese clinical trial registry (ChiCTR) 2200055372. Registered on 08 January 2022.
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.