ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Refractive outcomes following low astigmatism correction guided by toric calculator recommendations.
Article in International ophthalmology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine refractive outcomes after cataract extraction with a toric correction of 1.0 diopter as recommended by the Barrett Toric Calculator.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients who underwent cataract surgery in two tertiary medical centers with a toric intraocular lens (IOL) providing a 1.0 diopter correction in the IOL plane. Electronic patient charts were screened for preoperative and postoperative data, including visual acuity, subjective refraction, biometry measurements, and corneal tomography. Refractive outcomes were compared to a control group with low astigmatism who had undergone cataract extraction with a non-toric monofocal lens and another group with high-toric IOLs.
resultsTwenty-six eyes with low-toric IOLs (LT) were compared to 28 non-toric monofocal IOLs (NT) and 47 high-toric IOLs (HT). The trimmed (tr) mean centroid prediction error in refractive astigmatism (RA) was similar between LT and HT groups (0.08D@1.3° vs. 0.11D@93.0°, p = 0.24), as was the postoperative RA centroid (0.09D@109.8° vs. 0.2D@93.9°, p = 0.1). The LT group had a lower tr-mean centroid and absolute postoperative RA than the NT group (0.09D@09.8° vs. 0.49D@175.7°, p<0.001, 0.29D vs. 0.84D, p = 0.001). Simulation showed improved outcomes with low-toric IOLs in the NT group: lower centroid astigmatism (0.11D@35.1°, p = 0.001) and lower absolute residual astigmatism (0.54D, p = 0.009).
conclusionsCorrection of 1.0 diopter in the IOL plane demonstrates comparable accuracy and precision to higher astigmatism correction with toric IOLs, with potentially favorable refractive outcomes compared to patients eligible for this correction but fitted with monofocal non-toric IOLs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42018012What 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.