ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2021
Organic visual loss measured by kinetic perimetry and retinal electrophysiology in children with functional amblyopia.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of functional and structural impairments in best vitelliform macular dystrophy using visual electrophysiology and optical coherence tomography in pediatric and adult patients.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Visual electrophysiological assessment of children with poor response to treatment for functional amblyopia.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Resting state electroretinography: An innovative approach to intrinsic retinal function monitoring.Frontiers in physiology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo demonstrate an organic (retinal) amblyogenic defect in functional amblyopes not responding to treatment.
methodsTwenty-four children (Mean age: 5.9 ± 1.8 years; range: 4-10 years) with functional amblyopia were recruited for this study. All these children underwent complete ophthalmic and orthoptic evaluation. In addition, Kinetic Goldman Visual Fields (KGVF), Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT), full field flash electroretinograms (ffERG) and multifocal electroretinograms (mfERG) were also performed. Ratios were subsequently derived by comparing the amplitudes obtained from the amblyopic eye (AE) to the good eye (GE) for the a- and b-waves of the ffERG, as well as for the ring analysis of the mfERG.
resultsKGVF showed a central scotoma of varying size (3°-7°) and density (absolute to relative), with increasing target size in 14/24 patients whose best post-treatment vision in the AE ranged from 20/100 to 20/40. The scotoma decreased in size and density with improving vision until a plateau of recovery was reached. The remaining 10/24 patients with a vision ≥ 20/30 showed no scotoma. SD-OCT showed no significant difference between the AE and GE. ffERG and mfERG were obtained in 18/24 patients. The ffERG AE/GE ratio was abnormal in 7 patients, 5 of which had large scotomas on KGVF. The mfERG ring 1 AE/GE ratio was significantly (p < .05) attenuated in 9/18 patients out of which 3 were no longer amblyopic. However, there was no significant difference (p > .05) in ring 1 AE/GE amplitude ratio between those who achieved 20/50-20/40 (.81 ± .26) and those with ≥ 20/25(.86 ± .25).
conclusionsThe combined findings of central scotoma on KGVF and mfERG anomalies in patients who did not achieve optimal vision with treatment suggest an underlying organic defect impairing macular function.
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.