ArticleKorean journal of ophthalmology : KJO2017
Correlation between Uncorrected Visual Acuity and Macular Distortion in Idiopathic Epiretinal Membrane Patients.
Article in Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the association between degree of retinal abnormalities and uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) in idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) patients with a small amount of refractive error.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 49 eyes (37 patients) of idiopathic ERM patients. We investigated the association between visual acuity and macular status (central macular thickness [CMT], outer retinal integrity score, and inner retinal irregularity index) that was assessed by optical coherence tomography using multiple linear regression analysis. We defined visual acuity difference (VAD) as the difference between UCVA and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). We divided patients into two groups according to VAD size and compared clinical characteristics between the two groups. We also investigated factors associated with VAD using multiple linear regression analysis.
resultsBCVA showed significant association with CMT and outer retinal integrity score, while UCVA showed significant association with CMT and inner retinal irregularity index. Patients with a large VAD showed a similar level of BCVA compared to the small VAD group (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR], large VAD group 0.11 ± 0.11 vs. small VAD group 0.13 ± 0.12, p = 0.585). However, UCVA was worse (logMAR, large VAD group 0.44 ± 0.14 vs. small VAD group 0.18 ± 0.14, p < 0.001) and inner retinal irregularity was higher (large VAD group 1.06 ± 0.04 vs. small VAD group 1.04 ± 0.03, p < 0.001) in patients with a large VAD. On multiple linear regression analysis, the absolute value of spherical equivalent (standardized coefficient β 0.521, p < 0.001) and inner retinal irregularity index (standardized coefficient β 0.448, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with VAD.
conclusionsUCVA was associated with inner retinal irregularity in idiopathic ERM patients with a mild degree of refractive error. Inner retinal irregularity was also associated with degree of VAD, suggesting that the effect of refractive error correction is greater in patients with more distorted retina.
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.