ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology2010
From the laboratory to the clinic: molecular genetic testing in pediatric ophthalmology.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Identification of numerous novel disease-causing variants in patients with inherited retinal diseases, combining careful clinical-functional phenotyping with systematic, broad NGS panel-based genotyping.Molecular vision · 2022Article
- Access to genetic testing for rare diseases: Existing gaps in public-facing information.World medical & health policy · 2021Article
- Genetic Testing in Pediatric Ophthalmology.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2018Review
- Systematic evaluation of a targeted gene capture sequencing panel for molecular diagnosis of retinitis pigmentosa.PloS one · 2018Article
- Article
- Preserving vision in retinoblastoma through early detection and intervention.Current oncology reports · 2012Article
- Genetic diagnostic methods for inherited eye diseases.Middle East African journal of ophthalmology · 2011Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo review the current state of molecular genetic testing as it relates to pediatric ophthalmology and to discuss its uses.
designReview and evaluation of available molecular genetic testing.
methodsLiterature review and discussion of testing in practice based on the authors' clinical and laboratory experience.
resultsFee-for-service testing for many genetic eye diseases now is available. A report is always generated for fee-for-service testing. Detection of DNA variants in genes known to cause eye disease must be interpreted taking into account the variability of the human genome, the presence of benign variants (polymorphisms), and the carrier frequency of recessive alleles. Negative results in genetic testing are helpful in some disorders for which most of the causative genes are known and many disease-causing variants have already been reported, but are less helpful in those that currently have many undiscovered causative genes or novel mutations. Research-based testing also is available, but does not always yield a result. Patients with RPE65-associated Leber congenital amaurosis may be eligible for the current gene therapy trial. Patients with a variety of disorders may benefit from improved surveillance if their genetic diagnosis is known.
conclusionsEntry into the genetic testing system often is via the patient's ophthalmologist. Collaboration with geneticists and genetic counselors, use of web sites to keep up with the ever-changing availability and detection rates, and knowledge of clinical trials, when combined with excellent clinical diagnosis, can improve diagnosis and allow eligible patients to participate in treatment trials.
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.