Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41806158›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2026

A Comparative Clinical Study of 0.50% Versus 0.75% Pilocarpine Eye Drops for Improving Visual Performance in Presbyopia.

Dan Fu, Tian Han, Qiyu Wang, Jingbin Geng, Shulong Gu, Yuanjie Ji, Taomin Huang, Xingtao Zhou, Ye Xu

Abstract readClinical StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dan FuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Tian HanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Qiyu WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jingbin GengDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Shulong GuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yuanjie JiDepartment of Pharmacy, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Taomin HuangDepartment of Pharmacy, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xingtao ZhouDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Ye XuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. janetyeye@hotmail.com.

Funding

Construction of a 3D digital intelligent prevention and control platform for the whole life cycle of highly myopic participants in the Yangtze River Delta 21002411600National Key Research and Development Program of China 2023YFA0915000(04)National Natural Science Foundation of China 82371096Project of Shanghai Science and Technology 20410710100Project of Shanghai Xuhui District Science and Technology XHLHGG202104Shanghai Sailing Program 22YF1405800
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of 0.50% and 0.75% pilocarpine ophthalmic solutions for treating presbyopia.

methodsIn this prospective study, 22 presbyopic subjects (44 eyes) were assigned to use 0.50% or 0.75% pilocarpine bilaterally, once daily for 2 weeks. Primary outcomes included distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 66 cm and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40 cm under photopic and mesopic conditions, pupil size, refractive error, intraocular pressure (IOP) and patient-reported adverse events. Assessments were conducted at baseline, day 1 (after 1 and 6 h) and week 2 (after 1 h).

resultsNo serious adverse events occurred. Neither formulation affected IOP or refractive error significantly. Pupil constriction was greater in the 0.75% group than the 0.50% group (2.8 ± 1.1 vs. 2.0 ± 0.8 mm, p = 0.02). After 2 weeks, the gain in photopic DCNVA was 0.18 logMAR for both concentrations (p = 0.70). The respective gain in visual acuity measures for the 0.75% and 0.50% groups was: mesopic DCNVA, 0.14 and 0.19 logMAR (p = 0.25); photopic DCIVA, 0.14 and 0.09 logMAR (p = 0.02); mesopic DCIVA, 0.12 and 0.10 logMAR (p = 0.18).

conclusionBoth 0.50% and 0.75% pilocarpine improved visual performance in presbyopia significantly, suggesting it is a promising treatment option. CLINICAL

trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), 2023/3/2, No.ChiCTR2300068971.

Indexed as

PilocarpinePresbyopiaVisual AcuityAgedDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHumansIntraocular PressureMaleMiddle AgedMioticsOphthalmic SolutionsProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeMioticsOphthalmic SolutionsPilocarpineIntermediate visual acuityNear visual acuityPilocarpinePresbyopia

Identifiers

PMID41806158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.