Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15031157›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2004

Genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity in familial microcoria.

F D Bremner, H Houlden, S E Smith

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

F D BremnerDepartment of Neuro-ophthalmology (Box 142), National Hospital for Neurology & Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK. fionbremner@doctors.org.uk
H Houlden
S E Smith
University College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo describe the clinical features and genetic findings in two families presenting with microcoria inherited as an autosomal dominant trait.

methodsBoth affected and unaffected members of two families displaying familial microcoria were examined. Flash photography or infrared pupillography were used to assess pupils, and a full ophthalmic examination including visual acuity and field testing, refraction, biomicroscopy of anterior and posterior segments, and measurement of intraocular pressure were performed. DNA from the blood of affected and unaffected family members was investigated using standard markers to look for a possible gene defect in the chromosome 13q31-q32 region.

resultsAll affected members of both families had pinpoint pupils which responded normally to light and accommodation. None of these subjects exhibited any other ocular abnormality. The iris of affected members showed stromal thinning and apparent absence of the iris dilator muscle in the first family, but was smooth and lacked all trabecular structure in the second family. The microcoria was present at birth in the first family but developed progressively at a later age in the second family. Haplotype analysis suggested the gene defect is not located in the chromosome 13q31-q32 region in the first family but the evidence was not conclusive in the second family.

conclusionAlthough both families presented with similar pupil abnormalities inherited as an autosomal dominant trait, they show important phenotypic and genotypic differences suggesting that this is a heterogeneous condition. The possible mechanisms underlying the microcoria are discussed.

Indexed as

PupilAdultFemaleGenetic MarkersGenotypeHumansMalePedigreePupil DisordersGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID15031157
PMCPMC1772083
OpenAlexW1988740492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.