ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Effects of Custom-Designed Soft Contact Lenses on Irregular Astigmatism Correction in Patients with Keratoconus.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trends in the Management of Keratoconus in Australia.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of YOUSOFT soft contact lenses in correcting irregular astigmatism and prescription results of patients with keratoconus. Patients and Methods: The retrospective observational study included 55 eyes (mean age, 32.2 ± 10.6 years; 36 men and 6 women) of 42 patients with keratoconus who tried YOUSOFT for rigid gas permeable (RGP) lens intolerance. Average keratometry, corneal astigmatism, and maximum keratometry were 49.4 ± 5.2 diopters (D), 3.7 ± 2.1 D, and 57.3 ± 8.2 D, respectively. Patients were divided into YOUSOFT prescription and non-prescription cases, wherein the prescription rates were calculated. YOUSOFT visual acuity was compared with spectacle-corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and RGP lens-CDVA. Results: YOUSOFT was prescribed to 28 out of 42 patients (prescription rate 67%). In the YOUSOFT prescription cases, YOUSOFT-CDVA (logMAR -0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.08 to 0.00) was significantly better than spectacle-CDVA (logMAR 0.23; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.38; P < 0.0001), whereas YOUSOFT-CDVA (logMAR -0.03; 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.03) did not significantly differ from the RGP lens-CDVA (logMAR -0.02; 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.04; P = 0.856). Conclusion: YOUSOFT was effective in correcting irregular corneal astigmatism, suggesting that it is highly effective in patients with RGP lens intolerance.
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.