ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2026
Accuracy of Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation Using Three-Random-Point Marking Method: A Prospective Pilot Study.
Article in 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.
- Accuracy of Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation Using Three-Random-Point Marking Method: A Prospective Pilot Study.Journal of ophthalmology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of three-random-point (TRP) marking method with the slit-lamp horizontal meridian (SHM) marking method by using an image-guided system in the positioning of a toric intraocular lens (IOL). Materials and Methods: A total of 60 eyes of 54 patients who underwent cataract surgery were prospectively randomized into 3 groups (each group included 20 eyes: Group 1, novice doctor and dilated pupil patient; Group 2, novice doctor and small pupil patient; and Group 3, experienced doctor and small pupil patient). Every patient was marked three points (horizontal two points and random third point) in corneal limbus with a staining blunt needle and then measured by the iTrace system. The axis deviations from the SHM method (axis A, horizontal two points method) and the TRP method (axis B, three points method) were measured by the digital image-guided navigation system. Results: The axis deviations of each group showed a significant difference between the SHM and TRP marking methods (Group 1: SHM method: 3.05° ± 2.58° and TRP method: 0.85° ± 0.93°, Conclusions: The TRP marking method using the iTrace aberrometer was found to be more effective and more accurate than SHM marking method in the positioning of toric IOLs before surgery.
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.