ArticleScientific reports2021
Corneal ectasia in mothers of Down syndrome children.
Article in Scientific reports, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Keratoconus in Down Syndrome: From Etiology to Management - A Narrative Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Enhanced Diagnostics for Corneal Ectatic Diseases: The Whats, the Whys, and the Hows.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The Underlying Relationship between Keratoconus and Down Syndrome.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, corneal findings regarding keratoconus (KC) and early KC among mothers with Down syndrome children (MDS) and a group of age-at-delivery-matched mothers with normal children (MNC) were compared. KC was diagnosed based on the presence of a clinical sign and at least one abnormal tomographic or biomechanical criterion. Early KC was defined as having no clinical sign in the presence of at least one abnormal tomographic or biomechanical criterion. The normal subgroups in each group were compared in terms tomographic and biomechanical parameters. In MDS and MNC, the prevalence rates were 6.5% and 1.6% for KC (P = 0.047), and 30.9% and 14.3% for early KC (P = 0.014), respectively. Comparison between the two normal subgroups showed significant differences in mean index of height asymmetry, irregularity index, anterior asphericity, pentacam random forest index, corneal stiffness parameters at first applanation, deformation amplitude ratios, integrated radius-1 mm, highest concavity deflection amplitude, biomechanical corrected IOP, peak distance, and radius (all P < 0.05). This study showed that MDS are more likely to have KC and also to have thinner, steeper and softer corneas compared to MNC. This results support the need for further work for determining the risk of delivering a child with DS.
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.