Observational studyJournal of cataract and refractive surgery2025
One-year outcomes after implantation of an EDOF intraocular lens in patients with cataract.
Observational study in Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 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.
- An Evidence-Based Pathway from Functional Classification to Intraocular Lens Specialization: A Case Example Applying the PECO Framework.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of a new extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in patients with cataracts.
settingQvision, Department of Ophthalmology, VITHAS Almería Hospital, Almería, Spain.
designRetrospective observational.
methodsData were retrospectively reviewed for a cohort of 51 consecutively operated patients with cataract implanted with the ELON IOL and followed over a 12-month period. The variables collected for analysis included visual acuities (VAs) at various distances (far, intermediate, and near), light distortion index (LDI), defocus curves, and prediction error. In addition, patient-reported outcomes were gathered to assess spectacle dependence, satisfaction with vision, positive dysphotopsia, difficulties in daily activities, and patients' willingness to undergo the same IOL procedure again.
resultsMonocular data for efficacy were available for 36 patients at the 3-month follow-up and 23 patients at the 12-month follow-up. Median monocular distance-corrected VAs were 0 logMAR, 0.1 logMAR, and 0.3 logMAR at 4 m, 66 cm, and 40 cm, respectively, at 3 months and 12 months. Correlations between VAs and pupil diameter were found but only at near for binocular uncorrected (ρ = 0.38, P = .02) and monocular distance corrected (ρ = 0.31, P = .07). The median LDI reduced up to 9% at 12 months. No significant differences were found between follow-up visits for VAs and LDI ( P > .05); however, satisfaction, positive dysphotopsia, and willingness to undergo the same IOL procedure significantly improved from 3 to 12 months ( P < .05).
conclusionsThe ELON IOL extended the depth of field from far to intermediate distances, with some patients with smaller pupil diameters also achieving near vision restoration.
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.