ArticleScientific reports2025
The influence of peripheral vision on driving performance in patients implanted with an inverted meniscus intraocular lens.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Driving Performance Under Peripheral Defocus Induced by Ophthalmic Lenses for Myopia Control.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Impact of peripheral optical errors in age-related macular degeneration.Journal of optometryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose was to analyze and compare the influence of peripheral vision on driving while performing secondary visual-manual tasks in patients implanted with two types of intraocular lenses (IOLs): a standard monofocal IOL and a new inverted meniscus intraocular lens (ArtIOL). This study included 17 participants implanted binocularly with a standard monofocal IOL (control group) and 15 participants implanted binocularly with the ArtIOL. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were tested at 40 deg of eccentricity. Driving performance was assessed using a driving simulator. At some points of the route, participants were asked to perform a secondary task while driving. Among other driving variables, self-regulation of driving speed and was analyzed, and the overall driving performance score (ODPS) was calculated. The ArtIOL's group had better peripheral contrast sensitivity (p = 0.003); however, no differences were observed in peripheral visual acuity. Regarding driving performance, no significant differences were observed in the ODPS between the two groups. In the general route, participants implanted with ArtIOLs drove faster, particularly in the mountain road (p = 0.002). The ArtIOL's group self-regulated more for speed, particularly when the characteristics of the road were less complex (p = 0.037). An association was found between better contrast sensitivity and more positive values of the speed adaptation (rho = 0.342; p = 0.006). Thus, participants implanted with the ArtIOLs did not show a significant improvement in driving performance, but had a better contrast in the periphery that contributed to an increased self-confidence while driving.
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.