ArticleScientific reports2024
Effects of long-term neural adaptation to habitual sspherical aberration on through-focus visual acuity in adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Functional Intermediate Vision and Pupil-Dependent Optical Behavior After Implantation of a Segmented Refractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Basic Optics Underlying Current Intraocular Lenses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We investigated how long-term visual experience with habitual spherical aberration (SA) influences subjective depth of focus (DoF). Nine healthy cycloplegic eyes with habitual SAs of different signs and magnitudes were enrolled. An adaptive optics (AO) visual simulator was used to measure through-focus high-contrast visual acuity after correcting all monochromatic aberrations and imposing + 0.5 μm and - 0.5 μm SAs for a 6-mm pupil. The positive (n = 6) and negative (n = 3) habitual SA groups ranged from 0.17 to 0.8 μm and from - 1.2 to - 0.12 μm for a 6-mm pupil, respectively. Although all optical conditions were identical, and the subjective DoFs were expected to be the same for all participants, the DoFs of individuals differed between the positive and negative habitual SA groups. For the positive habitual SA group, the mean DoF with positive AO-induced SA (2.14 D) was larger than that with negative AO-induced SA (1.88 D); for the negative habitual SA group, a smaller DoF was measured with positive AO-induced SA (1.94 D) than that with negative AO-induced SA (2.14 D). Subjective DoF tended to be larger when the induced SA in terms of sign and magnitude was closer to the participant's habitual SA. Our findings suggest that neural adaptation to habitual SA compensated for optical blur at multiple object distances, perceptually expanding DoF. As a result, the outcomes of optical treatments for presbyopia may differ due to the neural compensation mechanism influenced by an individual's visual experience with their habitual optics.
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.