Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33117026›Full record

ArticleEye and brain2020

Neurofibromatosis Type 1: Ocular Electrophysiological and Perimetric Anomalies.

Marcella Nebbioso, Antonietta Moramarco, Alessandro Lambiase, Sandra Giustini, Marco Marenco, Emanuele Miraglia, Pasquale Fino, Chiara Iacovino, Ludovico Alisi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye and brain, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marcella Nebbioso *Department of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5512-0849
Antonietta Moramarco *Department of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro LambiaseDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8974-991X
Sandra GiustiniDepartment of Dermatology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7034-3816
Marco MarencoDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6978-3790
Emanuele MiragliaDepartment of Dermatology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Pasquale FinoDepartment of Dermatology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Chiara IacovinoDepartment of Dermatology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Ludovico AlisiDepartment of Sense Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5366-882X
Sapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNeurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a multisystemic disease caused by the mutation of PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate, through pattern visual evoked potentials (p-VEPs) and frequency doubling technology (FDT) Matrix perimetry, the objective and psychophysical functionality of the optic pathways in a group of NF1 patient.

methodsThe study group consisted of 26 patients affected by NF1 and 17 healthy controls. Each patient underwent a complete ophthalmological examination, p-VEPs with the evaluation of amplitude and latency of the P100 wave, and FDT perimetry, with the evaluation of central sensitivity (CS), mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD) and glaucoma hemifield test (GHT).

resultsNF1 patients showed a statistically significant alteration in the transmission of visual impulse. P-VEPs results highlighted a reduced amplitude and an increased latency of the P100 wave, suggesting an involvement of the visual pathway. Visual field analysis showed a significant reduction in all the observed parameters as well (CS, MD, PSD, and GHT).

conclusionThe present study showed, in NF1 patients, a qualitative and quantitative alteration in the conduction of stimuli through the visual pathways. The observed alterations are present, although, only at a subclinical level. None of the patients included in the study showed any manifest visual deficit nor had any concomitant pathology that might have affected the outcome of the study. In conclusion, electrophysiological exams and computer perimetry may take part, alongside a wider array of exams, in the differential diagnosis and later monitoring of NF1.

Indexed as

electrophysiologic testingFDTfrequency doubling technology Matrix perimetryneurofibromatosis type 1optic gliomapattern visual evoked potentials

Identifiers

PMID33117026
PMCPMC7585783
OpenAlexW3093835008

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.