Trial reportClinical optometry2025
Performance of a Toric, Monthly, Soft Contact Lens in Digital Device Users.
Trial report in Clinical optometry, 2025. 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.
- Performance of Delefilcon A Daily Disposable Contact Lenses in a Group of Digital Device Users.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Trial
- Contact Lenses and Vision-Related Quality of Life: Evidence and Clinical Insights.Clinical optometry · 2026Review
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 determine the performance of TOTAL30 for Astigmatism (T30fA; Alcon; Fort Worth, TX, USA) contact lenses (CLs) in existing CL wearers who are also frequent digital device users. Methods: This 1-month, 3-visit study recruited adult, 18- to 40-year-old subjects who were required to use daily digital devices for at least 8 hours per day. All subjects were refit into T30fA CLs. A text message visual analog scale (VAS) (±50 scale; positive being comfortable) evaluate at-home eye comfort across the day at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month. Subjects were evaluated at 1 month with the Computer Vision Syndrome Questionnaire (CVS-Q), Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) Quality of Life questionnaire, and a custom questionnaire. Results: A total 48 subjects were analyzed (mean age = 28.8 ± 6.3 years; 75% female). At 1 month, IDEEL daily activities, feelings, and work domains scores were 96.7 ± 6.6, 96.4 ± 6.2, and 94.8 ± 8.6, respectively. CVS-Q scores were 3.48 ± 3.73. Most of the subjects indicated that they were satisfied with the overall performance of the study CLs (81.3%) and with their level of eye strain with the study CLs (87.3%). When evaluating CL comfort with the VAS, comfort did not differ across the month at each time point (all p-value ≥ 0.16), yet CL comfort did decrease minimally across the wear day (all p-value < 0.001). Conclusion: These data suggest that the monthly study CLs can provide an excellent wearing experience for those with frequent digital device use.
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.