SynthesisCurrent cardiology reviews2020
The Association Between Keratoconus and Mitral Valve Prolapse: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Current cardiology reviews, 2020. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduced Retinal Blood Vessel Densities Measured by Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography in Keratoconus Patients Are Negatively Correlated with Keratoconus Severity.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Systemic Associations with Keratoconus.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Anterior pituitary, sex hormones, and keratoconus: Beyond traditional targets.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe debate pertaining to the association between Keratoconus (KC) and Mitral Valve Prolapse (MVP) continues to occur among physicians. The results of cross-sectional studies attempting to present the co-existing prevalence of these two diseases remain indeterminate. We compiled the first meta-analysis to determine the pattern of prevalence between the two diseases.
methodsTwo separate literature searches for cross-sectional studies were performed for this metaanalysis. The first search encompassed finding literature comparing the prevalence of KC between patients with MVP and a control group. The second search pertained to finding studies comparing the prevalence of MVP patients with KC and a control group.
resultsSix studies reported the prevalence of MVP in patients with KC and a control group. The prevalence was 41.6% in patients with KC and 11.5% in patients without KC (OR = 7.06 [95% CI = 2.41-20.64]). There was a significant heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 84%). Two studies showed the prevalence of KC in patients with MVP and a control group. The prevalence was 17.0% in patients with KC and 2.9% in the control group (OR = 5.07 [95% CI = 1.08-23.83]). There was no heterogeneity within the analysis (I2 = 0%).
conclusionThere is a statistically significant co-existing prevalence between MVP and KC. Patients with KC are more likely to present with MVP, and patients with MVP are more likely to present with KC.
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.