ArticleBeyoglu eye journal2025
Comparision of a Novel Trifocal Intraocular Lens and a Monofocal Enhanced Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in Visual Performance and Quality of Life Scores.
Article in Beyoglu eye journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of visual performance between three enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses under different refractive targets.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of trifocal and monofocal intraocular lens with enhanced depth of focus implantations. Methods: Forty patients who had bilateral implantation of the trifocal or monofocal extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses after phacoemulsification were included in the study. The pre-operative and post-operative examination findings were analyzed. At the 6 Results: While distance and intermediate visual acuities were similar at 6 months postoperatively, near visual acuities were found to be statistically significantly better in the trifocal group. The contrast sensitivity values were found to be statistically better in the EDOF group. In the trifocal group, 25% of the patients had low-intensity and 5% of the patients had moderate-intensity of photopic complaints, respectively, while 10% of the patients in the EDOF group had low-intensity photopic complaints. While spectacles independence could be achieved in all patients in the trifocal group, in the EDOF group, 80% of patients needed spectacles. When examining VF-14 test values without spectacles, it was found that the values of the trifocal group were significantly higher. Conclusion: Trifocal group performed better at near, although far and intermediate vision was comparable between the groups. On the other hand, a higher rate of photic phenomena was observed in the trifocal group.
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.