ArticleScientific reports2026
Factors influencing high expectations in patients undergoing corneal transplantation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Abstract
This study conducted a single-center cross-sectional analysis of 120 patients undergoing corneal transplantation to explore preoperative visual function expectations and contributing factors. Utilizing self-designed questionnaires and validated scales, significant item score variations were observed, highlighting higher expectations for independent daily activities and near-vision tasks. Multivariate analysis identified educational level, ophthalmic history, and neuroticism as independent influencers. A binary logistic regression model exhibited strong discrimination (AUC 0.858) and good calibration, validated through internal methods. Decision curve analysis favored the model, and ROC analysis pinpointed 0.293 as the optimal threshold for identifying high expectations. In the outpatient setting, thresholds of 0.20–0.30 are recommended for screening and trigger purposes, while 0.40 is suggested for referrals and resource allocation. Overall, patients displayed varied preoperative expectations, with educational level, prior ophthalmic history, and neuroticism notably impacting these expectations. The predictive model, in conjunction with decision curve and ROC-based optimization, provides actionable thresholds for enhancing preoperative communication and management. Multicenter validation and longitudinal studies are advised for further model refinement and evaluating long-term outcomes.
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.