ArticleBMJ case reports2019
Maculopathy from an accidental exposure to welding arc.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Are surfers and scuba divers an overlooked at-risk group for age-related macular degeneration?Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Photic Retinopathy: Diagnosis and Management of This Phototoxic Maculopathy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Electrical burn-induced vocal cord injury: insights from a case report and literature review.Case reports in plastic surgery & hand surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Welding light can cause photic retinal injury. We report binocular maculopathy induced by a brief exposure to electric arc welding light in a patient who could not equipped with protective device because of narrow space. A 47-year-old man performed electric arc welding for approximately 10-15 min without wearing protective device because of narrow space and subsequently experienced eye discomfort and decreased visual acuity. At the initial visit, his best corrected visual acuity was 0.5. Fundus examination, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) were performed. OCT showed disruption in the ellipsoid zone, and mfERG amplitudes in the central 10° were markedly reduced in both eyes. The decrease in visual acuity had been noted for at least 18 months. Using the proper protective device is essential in welding, despite short time periods of work. For patients with welding-induced photokeratitis, doctors should also consider the possibility of photic retinal injury.
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.