ArticleEye (London, England)2019
Evaluation of photoreceptor outer segment length in hydroxychloroquine users.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optical Coherence Tomography and Angiography in Hydroxychloroquine Retinopathy: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Ellipsoid Zone Dynamics During Hydroxychloroquine Use.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Automated Evaluation of Ellipsoid Zone At-Risk Burden for Detection of Hydroxychloroquine Retinopathy.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the photoreceptor outer segment (PROS) length in patients who use hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) prior to the development of retinopathy.
methodsIn this prospective, single-centre, comparative study, 44 patients using HCQ for ≥5 years, 30 patients using HCQ <5 years, and 45 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were enrolled. The participants underwent a detailed ophthalmologic examination, spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) imaging, and 10-2 automated visual field testing. The PROS length was defined as the distance between the inner surface of the ellipsoid zone and the inner surface of the retina pigment epithelium. The measurements were performed subfoveally and at 500-1000-1500 µm temporally and nasally to the foveola.
resultsThe mean PROS length of long-term users (≥5 years) was statistically greater than the controls at all measurement points (p < 0.001 at all points). Although the subfoveal PROS length was comparable between the long-term and short-term users (p = 0.148), the parafoveal PROS length measurements (nasal 1500 µm, nasal 1000 µm, nasal 500 µm, temporal 1000 µm, and temporal 1500 µm) of the long-term users were significantly greater than those of the short-term users (p < 0.001, p = 0.002, p = 0.027, p = 0.018, p = 0.001, respectively). No significant difference was found between the short-term users and the controls (p = 0.815, p = 0.395, p = 0.093, p = 0.079, p = 0.133, p = 0.686, p = 0.341, respectively).
conclusionThe PROS length was greater in patients who used HCQ ≥5 years. Possible retinal pigment epithelium toxicity may have caused this finding.
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.