ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2024
Establishing the cutoff value of near visual acuity for assessment of early presbyopia.
Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2024. 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.
- Drinking Habit Could Exacerbate the Progression of Presbyopia in Men.Clinical optometry · 2026Article
- Presbyopia Progression From the Age of 40 to 79 Years in Glaucoma Patients Treated With Prostaglandin F Receptor Agonists.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Presbyopia Between Glaucoma Patients Using Prostaglandin F Receptor Agonists and Fixed Combination Therapy.Clinical optometry · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere is limited evidence to evaluate the numerical cutoff point for detecting early presbyopia. Thus, we aimed to establish a clinically relevant optimal cutoff value of near visual acuity for detecting early presbyopia. STUDY
designProspective diagnostic accuracy study.
methodsWe included consecutive individuals aged ≥ 20 years with a binocular-corrected distance visual acuity of ≥ 20/25 who did not undergo ophthalmic surgery between December 17, 2020 and December 19, 2021, at two healthcare facilities in Japan. Binocular distance-corrected near visual acuity at 40 cm, accommodative amplitude, awareness of presbyopia, and Near Activity Visual Questionnaire scores were examined. The optimal cutoff values of distance-corrected near visual acuity for diagnosing early presbyopia were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic plots.
resultsAmong 115 participants, 74 (64.3%) had presbyopia. The proportion of participants with no difficulty performing near-vision tasks decreased markedly when near visual acuity decreased to 20/20 (> 0.00 logMAR). A cutoff value of 0.00 logMAR for distance-corrected near visual acuity was optimal, showing high sensitivity of 56.76% and specificity of 92.68%, as opposed to the commonly used cutoff value of 0.40 logMAR (20/50; sensitivity, 9.46% and specificity, 100%) for diagnosing early presbyopia.
conclusionNear visual acuity of 0.00 logMAR (20/20) could be the optimal cutoff value for diagnosing early presbyopia.
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.