Observational studyEye & contact lens2025
Slit Lamp Findings in Scleral Lens Wearers With and Without Subjective Fogging.
Observational study in Eye & contact lens, 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.
- Fluid Reservoir Characteristics in Established Scleral Lens Wear, Part I-Evaluation of Fluid Reservoir Depth and Midday Fogging.Eye & contact lens · 2026Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Scleral Lens Treatment in Ocular Surface Diseases: A Prospective Study.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe term "midday fogging" is used to describe visual blur, which some scleral lens wearers experience during use. The purpose of this study was to determine whether fit characteristics and biomicroscopic findings in habitual scleral lens wearers contribute to symptoms of fogging.
methodsThis prospective, observational study analyzed 48 habitual scleral lens wearers who wore lenses in one or both eyes from five clinical sites. Participants indicated whether they experienced fogging. Slit Lamp biomicroscopy was performed to evaluate fluid reservoir (FR) depth and presence or absence of limbal clearance, edge lift or impingement, conjunctival prolapse, and front surface nonwetting. Presence or absence of mucous strands, fine particulate debris, and diffuse haze in the FR were also noted. Backward elimination binomial logistic regression using one eye per participant compared the findings of eyes with and without subjective fogging.
resultsFogging was reported by 58% participants (28/48). Statistical analysis found no significant differences in scleral lens fitting characteristics of eyes with and without reported fogging. The presence of front surface nonwetting and diffuse haze were statistically higher in eyes with fogging.
conclusionIn this study, front surface nonwetting and diffuse haze observed with Slit Lamp biomicroscopy were associated with patient-reported scleral lens fogging.
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.