ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2021
Is Fixation Preference a Potential Indicator of Macular Function in Children?
Article in Turkish journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Fixation preference testing is widely used to detect amblyopia, particularly in preverbal children. Pattern electroretinogram (pERG) is an electrophysiological test which is a sensitive indicator of macular function. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between fixation preference and macular function on pERG in children with strabismus. Materials and Methods: The study included 11 children with strabismus. All underwent ophthalmological examination including fixation preference by binocular fixation pattern test, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) assessment, and pERG. Results: The mean age of the patients was 10.09±1.18 years. All patients had unilateral fixation. The mean BCVA was 0.85±0.17 in preferred and 0.48±0.19 in non-preferred eyes (p=0.003). The mean p50 amplitude was 6.07±2.06 μV in preferred and 5.29±2.20 μV in non-preferred eyes (p=0.203), and the mean N95 amplitude was 8.27±2.86 μV and 8.03±3.24 μV respectively (p=0.594). BCVA was correlated with p50 and N95 amplitudes in the non-preferred eyes (p=0.023 and p=0.014). Interocular BCVA difference was correlated with interocular P50 amplitude difference (r=0.688, p=0.019). Conclusion: Although amblyopia is typically considered a cortical phenomenon, future larger studies are needed to investigate the relationship between fixation preference and macular electrophysiological 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.