ArticlePloS one2020
Five-year follow-up of fundus autofluorescence and retinal sensitivity in the fellow eye in exudative age-related macular degeneration in Japan.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and risk factors of fellow-eyes wet conversion in unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration over 15-year follow-up.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the 5-year change in abnormal fundus autofluorescence (FAF) patterns and retinal sensitivity in the fellow eye of Japanese patients with unilateral exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
methodsPatients with unilateral exudative AMD who developed abnormal FAF in the fellow eyes were enrolled. FAF imaging and microperimetry were performed at baseline and follow-ups. FAF findings were classified into 8 patterns based on the International Fundus Autofluorescence Classification Group to assess retinal sensitivity. Forty-five points covering the central 12 degrees on microperimetry were superimposed onto the FAF images. Each point was classified depending on the distance from the abnormal FAF. "Close" was defined as the portion within 1 degree from the border of any abnormal FAF, and "Distant" was defined as the portion over 1 degree from the border of abnormal FAF. To investigate the association between the retinal sensitivity and distance from the abnormal FAF, hierarchical linear mixed-effect models were used with the distance, time and time squared from baseline (months), and angle (degrees) as fixed effects. Differences among patients, eyes, and test point locations were considered successively nested random effects.
resultsWe studied 66 fellow eyes with abnormal FAF. Twenty-seven eyes were followed-up during the 5 years. In the 13 of 27 eyes (48%), the abnormal FAF patterns had changed during the 5 years. We found retinal sensitivity was associated significantly with the distance from the abnormal FAF ("Distant": p<0.001, time2 from baseline: p<0.001, angle: p<0.001). The mean retinal sensitivity of the "Close" tended to deteriorate after the third year and eventually showed the similar sensitivity as the portion within the abnormal FAF.
conclusionFAF patterns can change about half during the 5 years and the retinal sensitivity near abnormal FAF tends to deteriorate after the third year.
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.