Trial reportPloS one2018
Utility values for age-related macular degeneration patients in Korea.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of age-related macular degeneration on work productivity: A meta-analysis.European journal of ophthalmology · 2024Pooled it
- Real-world cost evaluation of conbercept vs. ranibizumab for retinal and choroidal vascular diseases from 2021 to 2024: evidence from societal and medical insurance perspectives.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Risk Factors and Quality of Life in Patients With Geographic Atrophy, a Late Stage of Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Findings From the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Associations of mediterranean diet score and age-related macular degeneration in Korean elderly.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Conbercept vs. Ranibizumab for Age-Related Macular Degeneration, Diabetic Macular Edema, and Pathological Myopia: Population-Based Cohort Study and Markov Model.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is one of the most important causes of blindness globally and may lead to decreased quality of life. Utility values for AMD patients according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics have been little-studied, particularly among Asian populations.
methodsA total of 1,283 AMD patients were identified from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2008 to 2012. A 45-degree digital retinal image for each eye was used to identify AMD patients. The utility values, calculated by the three level version of EuroQol-5D, of AMD patients according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were determined. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to identify factors associated with reduced utility values among AMD patients.
resultsThe mean utility value for AMD patients was 0.8765. Patients who were older (mean utility value 0.8339), were women (0.8488), had lower education levels (0.8287), were not employed (0.8467), and had lower household income (0.8022) had lower utility values (all p values <0.001). Utility values did not significantly differ according to AMD subtype (p value 0.729), likely due to the lack of enough power as only 48 patients had late AMD. Patients with lower best-eye visual acuity (BEVA) had lower utility values compared to those with high BEVA, even among those with high worst-eye visual acuity (WEVA) (p value <0.001).
conclusionSociodemographic factors and visual acuity are important factors in determining the quality of life among AMD patients. Preserving BEVA, regardless of WEVA, may be associated with improved quality of life.
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.