ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2026
Age-stratified comparison of visual function between eyes with an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens and phakic eyes.
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.
- Contrast Sensitivity After Combined MIGS and Cataract Surgery: A Comparison of Monofocal and Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.Journal of clinical 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 function between pseudophakic eyes with enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and phakic eyes with clear lenses among patients in their 50s, 60s, and 70s. STUDY
designProspective comparative study.
methodsOne hundred thirty-eight eyes with enhanced monofocal IOLs (enhanced monofocal group) and 117 phakic eyes with clear lenses (phakic group) among patients in their 50s-70s were enrolled. Distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) at various distances, and photopic and mesopic contrast VA were evaluated at 2 months postoperatively and compared between groups.
resultsIn all age categories (50 s, 60 s, and 70 s), mean distance-corrected VA at the distances examined did not differ significantly between the enhanced monofocal and phakic groups. Mean contrast VA tended to be better in the enhanced monofocal group than in the phakic group. The difference was significant for photopic low contrast VA at 5% contrast in participants in their 50s (P = 0.002); mesopic contrast VA (P < 0.001) in participants in their 60s; and for photopic contrast VA at 10% and 5% contrasts and as well as mesopic contrast VA at 25% and 10% contrasts in participants in their 70s (P ≤ 0.003).
conclusionsAmong patients in their 50 s, 60 s, and 70 s, the accommodative range did not differ significantly between eyes with enhanced monofocal IOL and phakic eyes with clear lenses. Contrast sensitivity was generally better in eyes with enhanced monofocal IOLs than in phakic eyes, supporting the replacement of clear lenses with enhanced monofocal IOLs in patients of these ages with certain ocular pathologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41484527What 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.