ArticleInternational ophthalmology2017
Analysis of multiple sclerosis patients with electrophysiological and structural tests.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of optic nerve and retinal functions in demyelinating diseases using electrophysiological tests.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Demyelination and neurodegeneration early in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis contribute to functional deficits in the anterior visual pathway.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Alleviation of extensive visual pathway dysfunction by a remyelinating drug in a chronic mouse model of multiple sclerosis.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Functional Assessment of Outer and Middle Macular Layers in Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to analyze the effects of progressive myelin loss and neurodegeneration seen in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) on visual tract with electrophysiological and structural tests. Fifty-one patients diagnosed with MS in the Neurology Department were followed up in neuro-ophthalmology outpatient clinic irrespective of their visual symptoms, and were included in our study. The patients were classified as the ones with the history of optic neuritis (group II) and ones without the history (group I) of optic neuritis. The data, including clinical presentation, retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) measurements, pattern visual evoked potential (pVEP) and flash electro retino grams (ERG) test results, were recorded. In our study, comparison of pVEP test latencies of groups I and II with each other, and with those of healthy subjects revealed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). The analysis of rod functions on ERG did not show any significant changes (p > 0.05). However, both groups showed significantly decreased cone b-wave amplitudes, elongation of latencies, and decreased flicker amplitudes on cone and flicker potentials obtained after light adaptation (p < 0.05). There was significant thinning in RNFLT of the both groups when compared to the normal standards. The difference between two groups was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Axon loss is seen in the optic nerve with subclinical or acute optic neuritis in patients with MS. RNFLT analysis and electrophysiological tests are of great importance in diagnosis of MS, as well as to determine progression and to direct neuroprotective therapy in patients diagnosed with MS. Objective analysis methods gain more importance in the diagnosis and follow-up of MS patients, parallel to technological advancements.
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.