ReviewMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Blue-Light Filters in Eye Care: A State-of-the-Art Review.
Review in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blue-light filters now span spectacle, contact and intraocular lenses, but the term encompasses technologies with markedly different spectral characteristics and intended outcomes. This state-of-the-art narrative review synthesises peer-reviewed evidence on optical performance, digital eye strain, glare, photostress, sleep and circadian physiology, retinal phototoxicity, macular health, reported adverse effects and commercial translation. Near-clear spectacle filters preserve high-contrast acuity in most studies, but randomised and systematic reviews show no clinically meaningful average reduction in short-term digital eye strain. Some products reduce blue-colour contrast, particularly under low-contrast or low-light conditions, and adverse-event reporting is sparse. Studies of evening filters are heterogeneous: substantial amber attenuation can alter circadian light exposure, yet several trials have found no objective sleep benefit. Conventional visual outcomes with blue-filtering intraocular lenses are broadly comparable with ultraviolet-only lenses, although some individual studies report small mesopic colour or contrast disadvantages; long-term macular protection remains unresolved. Research on contact lenses is limited, typically short-term and often manufacturer-associated, and focuses on glare, photostress, scatter and perceived brightness rather than long-term health outcomes. Taken together, the evidence should be interpreted by filter spectrum and intended outcome, rather than treating blue-light filtering as a single intervention.
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.