Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27552292›Full record

ReviewRetina (Philadelphia, Pa.)2016

GEOGRAPHIC ATROPHY: Semantic Considerations and Literature Review.

Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg, Srinivas Sadda, Giovanni Staurenghi, Emily Y Chew, Monika Fleckenstein, Frank G Holz, CAM (Classification of Atrophy Meeting)-Group

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Geographic atrophy in Asia.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Geographic Atrophy in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg*Department of Ophthalmology, GRADE Reading Center, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; †Deparment of Ophthalmology, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; ‡Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences "Luigi Sacco," Eye Clinic, Luigi Sacco Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; and §Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Srinivas Sadda
Giovanni Staurenghi
Emily Y Chew
Monika Fleckenstein
Frank G Holz
CAM (Classification of Atrophy Meeting)-Group
University of Southern California · USLuigi Sacco Hospital · ITUniversity of Bonn · DEUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

Age-Related Eye Disease Follow-up Study (AREDS) Follow-up StudyZIAEY000489 · NEI · NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE · PI CHEW, EMILY Y · 2009 to 2025
$639k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 EY999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere is a lack of agreement regarding the types of lesions and clinical conditions that should be included in the term "geographic atrophy." Varied and conflicting views prevail throughout the literature and are currently used by retinal experts and other health care professionals.

methodsWe reviewed the nominal definition of the term "geographic atrophy" and conducted a search of the ophthalmologic literature focusing on preceding terminologies and the first citations of the term "geographic atrophy" secondary to age-related macular degeneration.

resultsAccording to the nominal definition, the term "geography" stands for a detailed description of the surface features of a specific region, indicating its relative position. However, it does not necessarily imply that the borders of the region must be sharply demarcated or related to any anatomical structures. The term "geographical areas of atrophy" was initially cited in the 1960s in the ophthalmologic literature in the context of uveitic eye disease and shortly thereafter also for the description of variants of "senile macular degeneration." However, no direct explanation could be found in the literature as to why the terms "geographical" and "geographic" were chosen. Presumably the terms were used as the atrophic regions resembled the map of a continent or well-defined country borders on thematic geographical maps. With the evolution of the terminology, the commonly used adjunct "of the retinal pigment epithelium" was frequently omitted and solely the term "geographic atrophy" prevailed for the nonexudative late-stage of age-related macular degeneration itself. Along with the quantification of atrophic areas, based on different imaging modalities and the use of both manual and semiautomated approaches, various and inconsistent definitions for the minimal lesion diameter or size of atrophic lesions have also emerged.

conclusionReconsideration of the application of the term "geographic atrophy" in the context of age-related macular degeneration seems to be prudent given ongoing advances in multimodal retinal imaging technology with identification of various phenotypic characteristics, and the observation of atrophy development in eyes under antiangiogenic therapy.

Indexed as

Geographic AtrophyMacular DegenerationSemanticsTerminology as Topic

Identifiers

PMID27552292
PMCPMC5115977
OpenAlexW2512871395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.