ArticleBiomedical optics express2026
Visual acuity measured with a 3 mm pupil and Maxwellian view for subjective vs. objective focus in patients with exudative retinal disease.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We demonstrate a potential vision tester (PVT), designed to improve the accuracy of visual acuity (VA) measurements in older eyes with exudative retinal disease quantified by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Key features include a high-resolution visual display presented in Maxwellian view, a 3 mm pupil to limit wavefront (WF) aberrations, a selected fixed cylinder lens to correct astigmatism, and a tunable lens to correct sphere. An external Hartmann-Shack-based autorefractor provided objective sphere and cylinder corrections. Subjective values of the sphere were obtained by the patient adjusting the tunable lens. VA was measured using four alternative forced choice for a single black-on-white E stimulus. In patients with exudative retinal disease, VAs did not differ when using the objective vs. subjective sphere values. The significant difference in the myopic direction for two subjective settings (-0.093, -0.28 D) vs. one objective setting (0.0 D) was too small to cause a difference in VA for this patient group, supporting the use of an autorefractor for VA measurements.
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.