ArticleEye (London, England)2025
Unaided reading speed in pseudophakic patients after emmetropic monofocal intraocular lens implantation.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to assess the reading speed and font size in pseudophakic eyes following implantation of a spherically neutral monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) aimed at an emmetropic refractive outcome.
methodsThis was a prospective, single-eye study on patients undergoing routine cataract surgery with a spherically neutral monofocal IOL and expected to achieve 20/40 or better-unaided vision. Eyes with surgical complications or co-existing ocular pathology were excluded. At 3-9 months post-surgery, manifest refraction, uncorrected and best-corrected distance (UCDVA and BCDVA), and uncorrected near (UCNVA) LogMAR acuity, spherical equivalent (SEQ) were assessed. Uniocular unaided reading speed and smallest print size were assessed using the Salzburg Reading Desk (SRD) at 40 cm.
resultsMedian UCDVA, BCDVA, UCNVA, and SEQ of 301 patients (301 eyes) with age of 75 years (IQR:70 to 82) were 0.14 LogMAR (IQR = 0.02-0.24), 0 LogMAR (IQR = -0.08 to 0.02), and 0 D (IQR = -0.13 D to -0.07), respectively. The unaided reading speed was 100-150 wpm in 42.8% (129 patients), followed by 151-200 wpm in 26.1% (78 patients). The median unaided reading speed with SRD was 130 wpm (IQR: 101.50 to 165.50). 30.9% (93 patients) read 0.4 to 0.5 LogMAR, followed by 10.8% (33 patients) for 0.3 to 0.4 LogMAR and 7.4% (22 patients) for 0.2 to 0.3 LogMAR. The median smallest font size was 0.48 LogMAR (0.40 to 0.61 LogMAR).
conclusionThis study establishes the baseline data of reading speed and font size with monofocal IOL, which can be used by further studies on extended depth-of-focus or multifocal IOLs for comparison.
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.