ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2024
Changes in visual performance after implantation of different intraocular lenses.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2024. 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.
- Analysis of visual quality after implantation of diffractive multifocal intraocular lens Diff - aA in cataract patients.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- A comparative study of extended depth of focus, bifocal intraocular lenses and their mix-and-match.International journal of ophthalmology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the trending visual performance of different intraocular lenses (IOLs) over time after implantation.
methodsNinety-one patients received cataract surgery with implantations of monofocal (Mon) IOLs, segmental refractive (SegRef) IOLs, diffractive (Dif) IOLs, and extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) IOLs were included. The aberrations and optical quality collected with iTrace and OQAS within postoperative 6mo were followed and compared.
resultsMost of the visual parameters improved over the postoperative 6mo. The postoperative visual acuity (POVA) of the Mon IOL, SegRef IOL, and EDoF IOL groups achieved relative stability in earlier states compared with the Dif IOL group. Nevertheless, the overall visual performance of the 3 IOLs continued to upturn in small extents within the postoperative 6mo. The optical quality initially improved in the EDoF IOL group, then in the Mon IOL, SegRef IOL, and Dif IOL groups. POVA and objective visual performance of the Mon IOL and EDoF IOL groups, as well as POVA and visual quality of the Dif IOL group, improved in the postoperative 1mo and stabilized. Within the postoperative 6mo, gradual improvements were observed in the visual acuity and objective visual performance of the SegRef IOL group, as well as in the postoperative optical quality of the Dif IOL group.
conclusionThe visual performance is different among eyes implanted with different IOLs. The findings of the current study provide a potential reference for ophthalmologists to choose suitable IOLs for cataract patients in a personalized solution.
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.