ArticleEye (London, England)2011
Best's macular dystrophy in Australia: phenotypic profile and identification of novel BEST1 mutations.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and genetic characterization of BEST1-associated retinal dystrophies in the Norwegian population.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Spectrum of variants associated with inherited retinal dystrophies in Northeast Mexico.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Photoreceptor Function and Structure in Autosomal Dominant Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy Caused by BEST1 Mutations.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022Article
- Bilateral consecutive choroidal neovascularization in Best vitelliform macular dystrophy.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Differential effects of Best disease causing missense mutations on bestrophin-1 trafficking.Human molecular genetics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose(1) To evaluate the spectrum of BEST1 mutations within Australian Best Disease or vitelliform macular dystrophy (VMD) pedigrees, including any novel mutations; (2) to analyse the range of clinical presentations of this cohort; (3) to determine any possible genotype-phenotype correlations and (4) to compare clinical data of patients with phenotypic VMD, both with and without a BEST1 mutation. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with suspected VMD were referred to clinical centres for ophthalmological assessment and genetic screening. When a mutation was identified in a proband, further family members were invited for clinical and genetic screening.
resultsWe identified 42 patients with one of 13 BEST1 mutations. Seven mutations were novel. There were a further 14 probands in whom a BEST1 mutation was not identified. Median visual acuity in both VMD (mutation positive) and clinical VMD (no BEST1 mutation identified) groups reached driving standards (6/12 or better).
conclusionWe did not identify any firm genotype-phenotype correlations in our Australian VMD pedigrees, in which there was a spectrum of BEST1 mutations and marked variation in clinical presentation. Genetic screening remains the gold standard for VMD diagnosis. Patients should be counselled that visual acuity might remain at or above driving standards in at least one eye even in the presence of a BEST1 mutation.
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.