ArticlePloS one2026
Visual acuity in controls and patients measured with Maxwellian view and a 3 mm pupil: Examining potential effects of inherent and induced aberrations.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Visual acuity measured with a 3 mm pupil and Maxwellian view for subjective vs. objective focus in patients with exudative retinal disease.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
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
Abstract
We sought to improve the measurement of visual acuity (VA) by reducing the effect of unwanted optical artifacts in patients with retinal disease. We evaluated the effects of age and of inherent and induced aberrations on VA for controls and patients with changes to the posterior segment, anterior segment, or both. We tested VA in 30 controls and 17 patients, using Maxwellian view and a 3 mm pupil. This method reduces wavefront aberrations and allows high spatial frequency information to be transmitted at a constant retinal illuminance. We reduced glare, crowding, and fixation errors by projecting a single letter E in a small field size. We corrected only defocus, then determined the extent to which VA and standard deviation (SD) were influenced by age and inherent wavefront aberrations (astigmatism, spherical aberration, and root mean square error higher order aberrations (RMSHO)), as well as by induced aberrations (spherical aberrations and coma). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) provided central macular thickness (CMT), which was compared to wavefront and VA results to determine the effect of retinal status. The use of Maxwellian view and a 3 mm pupil reduced aberrations, but the association between VA and inherent astigmatism (p = 0.011) was significant for controls, although not for patients. For controls, RMSHO significantly increased with age (p = 0.014), despite no impact on VA. Induced aberrations, which were as large as with 5 mm pupils, significantly worsened mean VA in controls (p < 0.001) and patients (p < 0.001), more for positive spherical aberrations than negative. Using Maxwellian view and a 3 mm pupil reduced optical aberrations and their effects on VA, important in managing patients with retinal disease. Only residual astigmatism was related to poorer VA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.