ReviewJournal of ophthalmology2019
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF
Review in Journal of ophthalmology, 2019. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of the dilution method on the intraocular duration of C3F8 in vitrectomy for macular hole: a randomized clinical trial.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2024Trial
- Cataract progression after primary pars plana vitrectomy for uncomplicated rhegmatogenous retinal detachments in young adults.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2024Article
- Comparison of Surgical Outcomes for Uncomplicated Primary Retinal Detachment Repair.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Main Principles of Vitrectomy Using Intraocular Tamponades - A Basic Course in Surgery.Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2022Article
- Efficacy of Pars Plana Vitrectomy with Internal Limiting Membrane Peeling for Treatment of Large Idiopathic Full-Thickness Macular Holes.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Macular Hole Repair with Triamcinolone Acetonide Visualization.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA systematic literature search was conducted to identify and review studies comparing SF
methodsPublications up to October 2018 that focused on macular hole surgery in terms of primary closure, complications, and clinical outcomes were included. Forest plots were created using a weighted summary of proportion meta-analysis. Analysis was performed separately for SF
resultsNine pertinent publications studying a total of 4,715 patients were identified in 2000 to 2017, including two randomized studies (
conclusionsBoth SF
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.