ArticleCureus2021
Epidemiology of Pediatric Open Globe Injuries in a University Hospital in Thailand.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Loss of eyeball and periorbital tissues due to craniofacial trauma: Clinical case].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Article
- Predictability of visual outcome based on injury size and location following penetrating ocular trauma in children.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Bibliometric analysis of published works in ocular trauma: a growing focus on open globe injury.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Epidemiology of Open Globe Injury in Children at a Tertiary Hospital in Jordan.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes of pediatric traumatic open globe injuries and to determine the risk factors for poor visual outcome.
methodsThe medical records of patients aged younger than 15 years of age who were diagnosed with open globe injuries from January 2005 to December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients' demographic data were collected, including age, sex, injury date, place of injury, mechanism of injury, cause of injury, and the activity related to the injury. Clinical data were recorded, including initial visual acuity (VA), wound size, wound location, associated ocular findings at presentation, and complications. The prognostic factors for a poor visual outcome were assessed.
resultsIn total, 46 pediatric patients were included in this study. The mean age was 6.8 years old. Most patients were male (65.2%). The most common type of injury was penetrating injury (60.9%) and mostly occurred during playing (60.9%). Household appliances/furniture and scissors/knives were common causes of injuries (17.4%, 15.2%, respectively). Poor final VA worse than 6/60 was found in 17 patients (37%). Wound location and retinal detachment (RD) at the time of presentation were significant prognostic factors for a poor visual outcome according to the univariate analysis (p = 0.008, <0.001). Only wound location at zone II and III was found to be significantly correlated with poor final VA in the multivariate analysis (adjusted risk ratio (RR) = 2.87, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.26-6.55, p = 0.012). Traumatic cataract was the most common associated injury (45.7%).
conclusionsOne-third of pediatric patients with open globe injuries had a poor visual outcome. Wound location at zone II and III significantly correlated with a poor visual outcome in pediatric open globe injuries. The parents and caregivers should be made aware of the seriousness of open globe injuries in order to prevent children from possible injuries.
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.