ReviewInternational ophthalmology2017
Congenital cranial dysinnervation disorders.
Review in International ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term surgical outcomes of esotropic duane retraction syndrome type 1.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Congenital isolated unilateral third nerve palsy in children: the diagnostic contribution of high-resolution MR imaging.Neuroradiology · 2023Article
- A Survey of Compound Heterozygous Variants in Pediatric Cancers and Structural Birth Defects.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Clinical Features of Duane Retraction Syndrome: A New Classification.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2020Article
- Duane Retraction Syndrome and Accompanying Ocular Abnormalities.Beyoglu eye journal · 2019Article
- Varied presentations of congenital ocular synkinesis: do they all fit congenital cranial dysinnervation disorder spectrum?Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The European Neuromuscular Centre (ENMC) derived the term Congenital Cranial Dysinnervation Disorders in 2002 at an international workshop for a group of congenital neuromuscular diseases. CCDDs are congenital, non-progressive ophthalmoplegia with restriction of globe movement in one or more fields of gaze. This group of sporadic and familial strabismus syndromes was initially referred to as the 'congenital fibrosis syndromes' because it was assumed that the primary pathologic process starts in the muscles of eye motility. Over the last few decades, evidence has accumulated to support that the primary pathologic process of these disorders is neuropathic rather than myopathic. This is believed that for normal development of extra ocular muscles and for preservation of muscle fiber anatomy, normal intra-uterine development of the innervation to these muscles is essential. Congenital dysinnervation to these EOMs can lead to abnormal muscle structure depending upon the stage and the extent of such innervational defects. Over last few years new genes responsible for CCDD have been identified, permitting a better understanding of associated phenotypes, which can further lead to better classification of these disorders. Introduction of high-resolution MRI has led to detailed study of cranial nerves courses and muscles supplied by them. Thus, due to better understanding of pathophysiology and genetics of CCDDs, various treatment modalities can be developed to ensure good ocular alignment and better quality of life for patients suffering from the same.
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.