ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology2019
Treatment for Central-Peripheral Rivalry-Type Diplopia ("Dragged-Fovea Diplopia Syndrome").
Article in American journal of ophthalmology, 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macular Diplopia Caused by Epiretinal Membrane.Cureus · 2026Review
- Prism Success in Patients with Diplopia and Retinal Pathology.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Central Mini-tenotomy and Environmental Modifications to Correct "Macular Diplopia" due to Sickle Cell Retinopathy in a Resource-limited Setting.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo report the effectiveness of treatments for central-peripheral rivalry (CPR)-type diplopia due to retinal misregistration.
designRetrospective, interventional case series.
methodsFifty adults with retinal misregistration and CPR-type diplopia (minimum frequency of "sometimes" at distance and/or for reading) caused by epiretinal membrane (n = 44) or other retinal disorders (n = 6) were enrolled in this study, conducted at adult strabismus clinics, Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, a tertiary medical center. Treatments included Bangerter filter, adhesive tape, Fresnel prism, clear prism (incorporated into glasses or loose prism in the office), iseikonic manipulation (using iseikonic lenses or contact lenses), a MIN lens, or epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling (alone or in any combination). Not all patients underwent all of these treatments.
resultsMain outcome measurements were diplopia frequency, evaluated using the Diplopia Questionnaire. Success was defined as "never" or "rarely" diplopic for distance and reading, using the Diplopia Questionnaire, at an outcome examination as close as possible to 6 months. Overall, 17 of 50 patients (34%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21%-49%) were classified as successful. Fresnel prism was successful in 4 of 7 patients (57%; 95% CI, 18%-90%); Bangerter filter in 4 of 28 patients (14%; 95% CI, 4%-33%); ERM peeling in 8 of 18 patients (44%; 95% CI, 22%-69%); and iseikonic manipulation in 1 of 23 patients (using a contact lens; 4%; 95% CI, 0%-22%).
conclusionsCPR-type diplopia may be relieved in some patients using nonsurgical treatment options consisting of Fresnel prism or Bangerter filter. ERM peeling was surprisingly successful and should be considered.
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.