ArticleInternational ophthalmology2017
Phenotypic characterization of epibulbar dermoids.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pediatric episcleral osseous choristomas: a case report.International journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to characterize the phenotypic presentation, clinical course, and outcomes of epibulbar dermoids (EpDs) which are the most common congenital eye tumor in children. Sixty-eight dermoids were identified in 58 eyes of 48 patients of Seattle Children's Hospital between 1981 and 2014 via electronic medical record search. Patients were organized into: "EpD-Only" [patients without other congenital anomalies (n = 13)], "EpD-CFM" [patients with a craniofacial microsomia (CFM) diagnosis (n = 25)], and "EpD-Other" [patients with other congenital anomalies (n = 10)]. All EpD in the EpD-Only group were unilateral and singular, while the EpD-CFM group had six cases with multiple unilateral EpD and five cases with bilateral EpD. In the EpD-Only group, 69 % of EpD were left sided, whereas in the EpD-CFM group, there was no side predisposition. Among both groups, the majority of EpD were limbal or lipodermoids in the inferotemporal quadrant of the eye. Surgery was more common and at a younger age in the EpD-CFM group than the EpD-Only group (56 vs. 38 %, 5.2 vs. 7.0 years). Follow-up surgeries occurred only in the EpD-CFM group (21 %). EpDs were most commonly associated with preauricular tags, congenital heart defects, genitourinary, and nervous system anomalies. Whereas the location and type of EpDs did not significantly differ between the groups, the phenotype in the EpD-Only group appears to be less complex. This may indicate an important difference between EpDs in isolation and those within CFM. Additional studies will further characterize these phenotypes and outcomes.
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.