ArticleCase reports in ophthalmology
Unexpected Etiology in a Case of Bilateral Maculopathy.
Article in Case reports in ophthalmology. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of genes involved in lysosomal diseases using the ClinGen clinical validity framework.Molecular genetics and metabolism · 2024Article
- Drug-induced corneal deposits: an up-to-date review.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2022Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 74-year-old woman with a history of rheumatoid arthritis using hydroxychloroquine presented with gradually progressive decreased vision in both eyes and was found to have a bilateral maculopathy. Initial genetic testing was negative, and after discussing the low likelihood of her severe findings being secondary to her relatively low hydroxychloroquine exposure, the possibility of an autoimmune retinopathy was entertained. Updated data on the genetic testing reclassified one of her mutations in HGSNAT as pathogenic. This case highlights the value of genetic testing and the need to keep a high index of suspicion even after initial negative results, given the fact that our knowledge of mutations leading to retinal degeneration is constantly evolving.
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.