SynthesisMolecular vision2019
Associations of rs524952 and rs634990 gene polymorphisms in 15q14 with high myopia: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Molecular vision, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Many studies have been conducted to investigate the association between the rs524952 and rs634990 polymorphisms and high myopia (HM). However, the results were conflicting. Thus, a meta-analysis was needed to reveal the real association between the two single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and HM. Methods: All eligible studies published in Pubmed, Embase, China Biologic Medicine (CBM), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science from 2010 to March 2019 were examined. Results: Six comparison groups in four studies with 5,293 subjects for the rs524952 polymorphism and five studies with 6,750 subjects for the rs634990 polymorphism were included. No statistically significant associations were observed between the rs524952 and rs634990 polymorphisms and HM under the allelic model, recessive genetic model, and dominant genetic model in this meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was conducted by dividing the studies into two groups according to the case sample size, which showed that the association between the rs524952 polymorphism and HM was found only in a subgroup of fewer than 300 cases under the dominant genetic model (OR=0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.43-0.96). Sensitivity analysis for the rs524952 polymorphism suggested the results of this study were stable under all the genetic models. However, the association between the rs634990 polymorphism and HM turned out to be statistically significant in the allelic, recessive, and dominant genetic models after the omission of Qiang et al.'s study. No publication bias was found. Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis suggested the rs524952 and rs634990 polymorphisms may have nothing to do with the development of HM. The present results must be confirmed with larger-scale studies in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31673225PMC6798703W2995468277What 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.