Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31833253›Full record

ReviewKorean journal of ophthalmology : KJO2019

Current Management of Childhood Amblyopia.

Shin Hae Park

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Refractive amblyopia among children aged 4-12 years in a hospital-based setting in Gaza Strip, Palestine.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2021
    Article
  16. Childhood amblyopia: A systematic review of recent management options.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shin Hae ParkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. vaccine@catholic.ac.kr.
Seoul St. Mary's Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amblyopia is defined as the reduction of best-corrected visual acuity of one or both eyes caused by conditions that affect normal visual development. The basic strategy to treat amblyopia is to obtain a clear retinal image in each eye and correct ocular dominance through forced use of the amblyopic eye. Treatment modalities include correcting any underlying organic disease, prescribing appropriate optical correction, and providing occlusion/penalization therapy for the non-amblyopic eye. Given the success of amblyopia treatment declines with increasing age, the detection and management of amblyopia should begin as early as possible during the sensitive period for visual development. Proper management of amblyopia during childhood can reduce the overall prevalence and severity of visual loss. This study aims to provide an update for the management of childhood amblyopia to provide better visual outcomes.

Indexed as

EyeglassesOrthokeratologic ProceduresTherapeutic OcclusionAmblyopiaAtropineChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleMuscarinic AntagonistsRefraction, OcularSensory DeprivationVisual AcuityAtropineMuscarinic AntagonistsAmblyopiaOptical correctionPatchingPharmacologic treatment

Identifiers

PMID31833253
PMCPMC6911788
OpenAlexW2981253108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.