Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25449942›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of ophthalmology2014

Controversies in neuro-ophthalmology: steroid therapy for traumatic optic neuropathy.

Rohit Saxena, Digvijay Singh, Vimla Menon

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Fasudil alleviates traumatic optic neuropathy by inhibiting Rho signaling pathway.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rohit Saxena
Digvijay Singh
Vimla MenonDr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an increase in the incidence of traumatic optic neuropathy (TON) due to increasing urbanization and rapid spurt in the number of motor vehicles on the road. Despite early presentation and ease of diagnosis the visual outcomes in TON are still limited. There is also significant confusion about the timing, dose and efficacy of steroid treatment in its management. PURPOSE: To provide a clinical update of the pros and cons of steroid therapy for TON.

designThe paper is a retrospective review of the currently available literature in the English language indexed in PubMed.

methodsA PubMed search was conducted by the authors using the following terms: Traumatic optic neuropathy, megadose, steroids, methylprednisolone. Relevant original articles, review articles, and case reports related to the topic of discussion were evaluated and discussed in the paper.

resultsThere is no prospective randomized control trial evaluating the effect of steroids in TON. There are varying reports on the effect of steroid therapy from significant improvement to no difference compared to observation.

conclusionThe decision to give steroids to patients with TON has to be on an individual case to case basis and must involve informed consent from the patient. There are documented advantages and disadvantages of steroid therapy and a prospective, randomized, controlled trial is necessary comparing steroids, surgery and observation before definitive management can be evolved.

Indexed as

NeurologyOphthalmologyVisual AcuityGlucocorticoidsHumansOptic Nerve InjuriesGlucocorticoids

Identifiers

PMID25449942
PMCPMC4278117
OpenAlexW2006206899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.