ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2023
Evaluating the relationship between induced aniseikonia and distance stereopsis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Impact of Refractive and Ocular Residual Astigmatism on Stereopsis After Photorefractive Keratectomy in Patients With Myopic Astigmatism.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Increasing myopic refraction reduces random dot stereopsis in Chinese myopic patients: a cross-sectional study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The impact of aniseikonia on stereopsis has been studied for decades, however, inconsistency which may be partly attributed to the method of inducing aniseikonia exists among these findings. This study aimed to induce overall and meridional aniseikonia using a three-dimensional (3D) computer and then evaluate the effect of induced aniseikonia on distance stereopsis using contour-based and random-dot-based patterns. Methods: A 3D laptop was used to produce all of the test symbols. Unlike the usual method of creating aniseikonia with size lenses, which would change not only the size but also the relative position of the test symbols in the two images as seen by the two eyes, a new test system was designed to evaluate the aniseikonia, which only modified the size while maintaining the relative position of the test symbols. This new method reduced the disparities induced by location changing of the paired test targets when inducing aniseikonia. Aniseikonia was induced overall or in one of the meridians. The induced meridional aniseikonia included 180°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°, respectively. The range of induced aniseikonia was 0-30% with an increment of 5%. Results: Overall magnification affected stereopsis more than magnification in any one of the meridians. The stereoacuity differences between oblique meridians (30°, 45°, and 60°) were not significant until the aniseikonia increased up to 20%. The difference between 180°, 45°, and 90° was significant when the aniseikonia increased up to 10% in the contour-based test and over 20% in the random-dot-based test. The stereoacuity trend was improved gradually, coupled with the angle changing from 180º to 90º in the contour-based pattern, and deteriorated gradually in the random-dot-based pattern. Conclusions: Overall aniseikonia affected stereopsis more than meridional aniseikonia. The stereoacuity of the contour-based pattern was superior to that of the random-dot-based pattern in the 90° meridian, while the opposite result was obtained in the 180° meridian.
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.