ArticleJournal of optometry
Binocular vision parameters and visual performance in bilateral keratoconus corrected with spectacles versus rigid gas-permeable contact lenses.
Article in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a three-month period of mini-scleral lens usage on intraocular pressure and the anterior chamber angle in patients with keratoconus.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Article
- Visual rehabilitation using rigid gas permeable contact lenses after femtosecond laser-assisted minimally invasive lamellar keratoplasty in patients with keratoconus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- One-Year Results of a Posterior Chamber Toric Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation in Patients with Keratoconus.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- The impact of contact lenses on binocular vision in patients with Keratoconus.Journal of optometryArticle
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
purposeTo analyze binocular vision of individuals aged 18 to 35 years diagnosed with keratoconus, utilizing spectacles and rigid gas-permeable (RGP) contact lenses. Research was led by the Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes, México and Fundación Universitaria del Área Andina Pereira, Colombia.
methodsA single center, prospective non-randomized, comparative, interventional, open-label study, in which the differences in binocular vision performance with both spectacles and RGP contact lenses was carried out from December 2018 to December 2019. Sampling was performed according to consecutive cases with keratoconus that met the inclusion criteria until the proposed sample size was reached.
resultsRigid gas-permeable (RGP) contact lenses notably enhanced distance and near visual acuity in keratoconus patients compared to spectacles. Visual alignment analysis shows exophoria at both distances and is slightly higher with RGP contact lenses. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05), with 82.5 % presenting compensated phoria with spectacles and pnly 42.50% with RGP contact lenses. Stereoscopic vision improved while wearing RGP contact lenses (42.59 %), although accommodation and accommodative flexibility remained within normal ranges.
conclusionsPatients with keratoconus fitted with RGP contact lenses have improved binocular vision skills such as visual acuity, stereopsis, and accommodative flexibility. However, even when the vergence and motor system is decompensated with respect to normal ranges, the range between break and recovery points for both fusional reserves and the near point of convergence (NPC) improves with the use of RGP contact lenses, giving indications of an adaptive condition of the motor system from the medium to the long term.
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.