ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2026
Visual outcomes of implantable Collamer lens and laser-assisted
Article in International journal of 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the clinical outcomes of the current V4c model of the myopic implantable Collamer lens (ICL) with those of laser
methodsThis prospective, non-randomized study enrolled participants who underwent either LASIK or implantation of the ICL V4c at Bolor Melmii Eye Hospital. In the LASIK group, participants received Intralase LASIK (I-LASIK) using the Intralase FS-200 femtosecond laser and the MEL-80 excimer laser. Each group comprised the same number of participants and eyes (38 participants, 73 eyes).
resultsA total of 146 eyes from 76 participants were analyzed. Among the LASIK group, 76.3% were female, with a mean age at surgery of 29.76±5.95y (range, 20-43y). In the ICL group, 92.1% were female, with a mean age of 31.59±8.32y (range, 20-49y). Preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) did not differ significantly between the LASIK and ICL groups (
conclusionBoth LASIK and ICL implantation leads to significant improvements in visual outcomes, with early postoperative gains observed in both groups. However, the ICL group demonstrates greater long-term improvement in BCVA compared to the LASIK group, particularly among participants with higher degrees of myopia. Visual outcomes in both groups stabilized by 6mo postoperatively.
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.