ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2026
Age-related difference in the presbyopia-correcting effect of trifocal and enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses.
Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2026. 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.
- Prevalence and associated factors of uncorrected presbyopia among adults in cross-sectional Fujian Eye Study.Frontiers in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare visual outcomes among three age groups in eyes with a trifocal (Alcon PanOptix STUDY
designNonrandomized comparative study.
methodsSeventy-eight eyes of 78 patients who received a trifocal IOL (trifocal category) and 78 eyes of 78 patients who received an enhanced monofocal IOL (enhanced monofocal category) were enrolled. Patients were stratified by age decade (n=26/group): 40-59 years of age (40s & 50s), 60-69 years of age (60s), and 70-79 years of age (70s). Uncorrected and distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) at various distances and photopic and mesopic contrast VA were examined at 3 months postoperatively and compared among age groups.
resultsNo significant differences in the mean uncorrected and distance-corrected VAs were detected at nearly all distances among the three age groups for either the trifocal or enhanced monofocal category. Mean photopic contrast VA was significantly different among the three age groups at 100% contrast for the trifocal category (P=0.018) and at 25%, 10%, 5%, and 2.5% contrasts in the enhanced monofocal category (P≤0.005); it was significantly better in the 40s & 50s age group than in the 60s or 70s age group (P≤0.002).
conclusionAll-distance VA in eyes with a trifocal IOL and an enhanced monofocal IOL was essentially comparable among patients 40-79 years of age although contrast sensitivity was significantly worse in older patients, suggesting that these IOLs can be implanted irrespective of patient age with careful consideration of the age-dependent decline in contrast sensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40632441What 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.