ReviewWorld journal of diabetes2016
In vivo corneal confocal microscopy in diabetes: Where we are and where we can get.
Review in World journal of diabetes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preclinical Safety and Feasibility Study of Line-Field Confocal Optical Coherence Tomography for Ophthalmology Applications.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2022Article
- Corneal and Epidermal Nerve Quantification in Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Tear Levels of IGFBP-3: A Potential Biomarker for Diabetic Nerve Changes in the Cornea.Eye & contact lens · 2020Review
- Biomarkers of response to alpha-lipoic acid ± palmitoiletanolamide treatment in patients with diabetes and symptoms of peripheral neuropathy.Endocrine · 2019Article
- Explanations for less small fibre neuropathy in South Asian versus European subjects with type 2 diabetes in the UK.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2018Article
- Diabetic Neuropathy: New Insights to Early Diagnosis and Treatments.Journal of diabetes researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In vivo corneal confocal microscopy (IVCCM) is a novel, reproducible, easy and noninvasive technique that allows the study of the different layers of the cornea at a cellular level. As cornea is the most innervated organ of human body, several studies investigated the use of corneal confocal microscopy to detect diabetic neuropathies, which are invalidating and deadly complications of diabetes mellitus. Corneal nerve innervation has been shown impaired in subjects with diabetes and a close association between damages of peripheral nerves due to the diabetes and alterations in corneal sub-basal nerve plexus detected by IVCCM has been widely demonstrated. Interestingly, these alterations seem to precede the clinical onset of diabetic neuropathies, paving the path for prevention studies. However, some concerns still prevent the full implementation of this technique in clinical practice. In this review we summarize the most recent and relevant evidences about the use of IVCCM for the diagnosis of peripheral sensorimotor polyneuropathy and of autonomic neuropathy in diabetes. New perspectives and current limitations are also discussed.
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.