SynthesisPloS one2014
Meta-analysis of the association between lumican gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to high Myopia.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polymorphism in the RASGRF1 gene with high myopia: A meta-analysis.Molecular vision · 2015Pooled it
- Insight into the molecular genetics of myopia.Molecular vision · 2017Review
- Construction of adenovirus vectors encoding the lumican gene by gateway recombinant cloning technology.International journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
- Analysis of the association between theClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2016Article
- The small leucine-rich repeat proteoglycans in tissue repair and atherosclerosis.Journal of internal medicine · 2015Review
- Effect of pupil size on higher-order aberrations in high-myopic pseudophakic eyes with posterior staphyloma.Eye (London, England) · 2015Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundsMany studies have evaluated the association between lumican (LUM) gene polymorphisms and high myopia. However, the results remain controversial. This meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the relationship between two common LUM polymorphisms (rs3759223 and rs3759222) and the risk of high myopia.
methodsA comprehensive literature search for studies published up until September of 2013 was performed. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and the weighted Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) for the associations were obtained by using a random-effects model.
resultsEight studies (1425cases and 1271 controls) were identified for the analysis of the association between rs3759223 polymorphism and high myopia. The results indicated that rs3759223 polymorphism was associated with high myopia under a recessive model (OR = 1.71, 95%CI 1.04-2.81). Further subgroup analysis indicated that this polymorphism was associated with high myopia among Chinese people in the additive model (OR = 1.17, 95%CI 1.06-1.29) and a recessive model (OR = 1.75, 95%CI 1.00-3.06) with control group coming from hospital based population. Four studies (1024 cases and 1163 controls) were identified for the analysis of the association between rs3759222 polymorphism and high myopia. The results indicated that rs3759222 polymorphism was not associated with high myopia in all genetic models, even the subgroup analysis couldn't provide relative proof to assure the outcome.
conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that LUM polymorphisms are associated with the risk of high myopia. However, well-designed studies with larger sample sizes and more ethnic groups are required to further validate this association.
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.