ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Monofocal intraocular lens based on the Bessel principle for improved intermediate vision: a comparative assessment.
Article in BMC 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the optical qualities of a novel enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) - Extend (Hanita), against a well-established IOL - Eyhance (ICB00, J&J Vision) - through in vitro benchmarking.
methodsOptical benchmarking was conducted using the OptiSpheric IOL PRO2 device in compliance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) guidelines. Optical quality was assessed using the modulation transfer function (MTF), point spread function (PSF), area under the MTF (MTFa), and 1951 USAF test charts. Measurements were taken at 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm apertures using a model cornea that induced 0.13 μm of spherical aberration to simulate clinical performance.
resultsBoth IOLs demonstrated comparable optical performance. At a 3 mm aperture, the Extend produced an average MTF at 50 lp/mm of 0.38 ± 0.01, while the ICB00 produced 0.36 ± 0.01. The MTFa and derived logMAR visual acuity (VA) curves showed nearly complete overlap for defocus levels less than - 1.25 D, with both lenses yielding identical VA at far focus (-0.09 logMAR). At higher defocus levels, the observed difference between the models accounted for < 0.02 logMAR, which is small and below the resolution threshold of standard VA testing. Point spread function assessments revealed comparable light distribution for both IOLs.
conclusionUnder laboratory conditions, the Hanita Extend IOL shows comparable results to the Eyhance ICB00 regarding MTF function, USAF-Chart images, and PSF assessment.
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.