ArticleThe EPMA journal2015
Retinal venous pressure in chronic smokers.
Article in The EPMA journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retinal venous pressure measurements in patients with Flammer syndrome and metabolic syndrome.The EPMA journal · 2017Article
- The discovery of the Flammer syndrome: a historical and personal perspective.The EPMA journal · 2017Review
- Nutritional recommendations for individuals with Flammer syndrome.The EPMA journal · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe overall aim of this study was to determine retinal venous pressure (RVP) in healthy chronic smokers and compare values to those of healthy non-smokers.
methodsBoth eyes of 25 healthy chronic smokers and 41 healthy non-smokers were included. Measurements of RVP were performed by means of contact lens ophthalmodynamometry. Ophthalmodynamometry is done by applying increasing force on the eye via a contact lens. If a spontaneous venous pulsation was present, it was noted. If not, the compressive force was increased until the first venous pulsation was detected, and the measurement value was fixed and read. RVP was calculated as the sum of pressure increase induced by the instrument and intraocular pressure.
resultsSmokers had a significantly higher frequency of spontaneous venous pulsations than non-smokers (p < 0.001). Mean values of RVP were slightly lower in smokers than in non-smokers: 15.3 and 15.5 (smokers) versus 15.9 and 16.2 (non-smokers) for the right and left eye, respectively; however, the difference in RVP between the two groups did not reach significance. There was no significant difference in blood pressure between the two groups, but heart rate was significantly higher in smokers (p = 0.043).
conclusionsRVP values may differ in healthy smokers than in non-smokers. Therefore, smoking habits should be considered when interpreting RVP results.
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.