Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33567434›Full record

ReviewOphthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde2021

Clinical Perspectives and Trends: Microperimetry as a Trial Endpoint in Retinal Disease.

Yesa Yang, Hannah Dunbar

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ophthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yesa YangUCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Hannah DunbarUCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Moorfields Eye Hospital · GBMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endpoint development trials are underway across the spectrum of retinal disease. New validated endpoints are urgently required for the assessment of emerging gene therapies and in preparation for the arrival of novel therapeutics targeting the early stages of common sight-threatening conditions such as age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular oedema. Visual function measures are likely to be key candidates in this search. Over the last 2 decades, microperimetry has been used extensively to characterise functional vision in a wide range of retinal conditions, often detecting subtle defects in retinal sensitivity that precede visual acuity loss and tracking disease progression over relatively short periods of time. Given these appealing features, microperimetry has already been adopted as an endpoint in interventional studies, including multicentre trials, on a modest scale. A review of its use to date shows a concurrent lack of consensus in test strategy and a wealth of innovative disease and treatment-specific metrics which may show promise as clinical trial endpoints. There are practical considerations to consider for its use, but these have not held back its popularity and it remains a widely used psychophysical test in research. Endpoint development trials will undoubtedly be key in understanding the validity of microperimetry as a clinical trial endpoint, but existing signs are promising.

Indexed as

Macular DegenerationRetinal DiseasesHumansVisual AcuityVisual FieldsVisual Field TestsEndpointsFundus-automated perimetryFundus-related perimetryMicroperimetryOutcome measures

Identifiers

PMID33567434
PMCPMC8686703
OpenAlexW3128459083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.