Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25397785›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2015

How does the structure of extraocular muscles and their nerves affect their function?

J R Bruenech, I B Kjellevold Haugen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J R BruenechBiomedical Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, Buskerud and Vestfold University College, Campus Kongsberg, Kongsberg, Norway.
I B Kjellevold HaugenInstitute for Biomedical Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Buskerud University College · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sensory and motor control of human extraocular muscles (EOMs) have been subjected to considerable speculation in ophthalmic literature, often related to infranuclear structures such as the unique complement of muscle fibres and their associated sensory organs. The intrafusal fibres do not resemble their somatic counterparts and their peculiar morphology has raised questions about their proprioceptive capacity. No Golgi tendon organs have so far been observed and the myotendinous nerve endings, previously assumed to convey sensory information, have recently been argued to merely represent constituents of the efferent innervation serving the multiply innervated muscles fibres. These observations raise questions about the overall capacity to monitor the activity created by the generous efferent nerve supply observed in these muscles. Furthermore, the argued independent activity of muscular layers and compartments suggest that the required feedback must be highly structured and more specific than previously assumed. Yet, uncertainty about the source of such information remains. The purpose of this paper is to provide a short review of neuromuscular properties of human extraocular muscles. Their functional implications and the most reputable sources of proprioception will also be discussed. The promoted views are based on pertinent literature and previous research undertaken by the authors.

Indexed as

Eye MovementsHumansMotor NeuronsNerve Fibers, MyelinatedNerve Fibers, UnmyelinatedOculomotor MusclesProprioceptionTendons

Identifiers

PMID25397785
PMCPMC4330282
OpenAlexW2003523849

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.