ArticlePloS one2025
Reading through the eyes of a university student: A double-masked randomised placebo-controlled cross-over protocol investigating coloured spectacle lens efficacy in adults with visual stress.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04318106 (Reading; Through the Eyes of a University Student. A Double-masked, Randomised Control Trial to Assess the Effect of Precision Tinted Spectacle Filters on Visual Stress Symptoms Within the University Student Population), which is not on this 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.
Reading; Through the Eyes of a University Student. A Double-masked, Randomised Control Trial to Assess the Effect of Precision Tinted Spectacle Filters on Visual Stress Symptoms Within the University Student Population
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisual stress is a reading disorder characterised by perceptual distortions, asthenopia and headache whilst reading, alongside increased sensitivity to repeated striped patterns ('pattern glare'), in the absence of underlying ocular pathology. Coloured filters including tinted spectacle lenses and coloured overlays/acetates have been reported to ameliorate visual stress symptoms. However, evidence on coloured spectacle lenses efficacy at managing symptoms of visual stress, particularly in adults, is lacking, with recent systematic reviews advocating the need for large-scale randomised control trials.
methodsThis is a double-masked randomised placebo-controlled superiority trial. University students identified with symptoms of visual stress, through use of a reading symptom questionnaire and mid-spatial frequency pattern glare test, will be recruited. Sample size for power of 90% at 5% significance, accounting for 10% dropout will be 65. Participants will be randomly assigned experimental and control coloured spectacle lenses to wear for six weeks followed by a two week washout period, prior to wear of the alternate lenses for a further six weeks with a two week washout period. Participants will compare both sets of spectacle lenses in a 'head-to-head' comparison after the secondary washout period, prior to choosing the preferred lenses for voluntary future wear. Long-term adherence to the preferred lenses will be assessed three months post-comparison. Researchers and participants will be masked to spectacle lenses worn throughout the duration of the trial. Reading performance will be assessed with both sets of lenses at various time points within the trial. A range of reading tests, reading symptoms and pattern glare evaluation will be used to monitor change in reading performance and visual stress symptoms during the trial. DISCUSSION: The study will evaluate the hypothesis that coloured spectacle lenses increase reading speed and reduce severity and frequency of reading symptoms in adults with visual stress.
trial registrationThe trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04318106.
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.