ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Biomechanical simulations of crystalline lens oscillations resulting from the changes in the gaze in an accommodated eye.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: The goal of the study is to introduce a generic, versatile biomechanical model that aims to reproduce the dynamic wobbling phenomenon. Methods: A systematic strategy is used, which includes a) capturing the Results: Examples of lens wobbling patterns for six measured eyes were presented, and parameters characterizing the oscillatory motion were determined, including frequency of oscillations, Q-factor, damping factor and time constant. The average values of these parameters are the following: frequency: 20.0 ± 2.4 Hz; Q-factor: 1.86 ± 0.44; damping factor: 0.27 ± 0.06; time constant: 0.11 ± 0.06 s. The data reproduced by means of simulations: frequency: 19.3 Hz; Q-factor: 2.17; damping factor: 0.23; time constant: 0.15 s. This comparison reveals a good agreement between the measured and reconstructed data with the values being within the standard deviation limits. Conclusion: The developed generic model together with the presented methodology is able to reconstruct the typical crystalline lens wobbling dynamics with a satisfying accuracy. However, the observed intersubject variability highlights the need for personalized biomechanical models. The introduced model may constitute the basis for future individualization of the data, bringing broad perspectives for prospective investigations aimed to explain the biomechanical mechanisms within the eye.
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.