ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2026
Comparison of Wavefront-optimised Refraction Determined Pre- and Post-cycloplegia in Individuals with Down Syndrome.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare metric-optimised refractions determined from wavefront aberration measures with the COAS-HD wavefront aberrometer pre- and post-dilation and the resultant visual acuity through each refraction in participants with Down syndrome (DS).
methodsTwenty-one adults (mean age = 31 ± 9 years) and 21 children (mean age = 11 ± 4 years) with DS had wavefront aberrations measured pre- and post-dilation. A mathematical programme applied a large range of sphero-cylindrical refractions to the uncorrected wavefront error for each eye and calculated the resultant visual Strehl ratio (VSX). The refraction providing the single best value of VSX was identified from both the pre- and post-dilation analyses. Participants returned for a second visit for in-office tests of visual acuity while viewing through pre- and post-dilation-optimised refractions. For analysis, refractions were converted to M, J
resultsThe estimated median total dioptric difference (Q1, Q3) between pre- and post-dilation refractions was 0.66 D (0.47, 1.11) in the right and 0.80 D (0.44, 1.12) in the left eyes of children and 0.90 D (0.41, 1.43) and 0.74 D (0.42, 1.32) in the right and left eyes of adults. The M-value was significantly more hyperopic in both children and adults post-dilation (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in the monocular or binocular distance visual acuity between the pre- and post-dilation acuity measures in adults and children (p > 0.14).
conclusionsDilation status significantly affected the metric-optimised refractive outcomes but did not affect visual acuity significantly in adults and children with DS. While the median difference between pre- and post-dilation measures was around 0.66-0.90 D, some individual differences reached multiple dioptres, suggesting that dilation upon an initial visit is still important for a subset of individuals.
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.