ArticleScientific reports2022
Fireworks ocular injury in Saudi children: profile and management outcomes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A 17-Year Descriptive Analysis of Firework-Related Eye Injuries on Territory Day in Northern Australia.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
- Significant increase of firework induced eye injuries in Germany and The Netherlands- are we doing enough to protect minors and bystanders?Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Severe Ocular Trauma Caused by Fireworks Injury: A Case Series.Middle East African journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To explore the demographic profiling, causes, types, complications, management outcomes, and severity of fireworks-inflicted ocular injuries in children in KSA. This is a retrospective study of 115 cases with eye injuries managed at the Emergency Department, of our institution between 2003 and 2019. Demography, clinical features at presentation, mode of management and the Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were evaluated at the last follow up. The study included 117 eyes of 115 children [median age: 9 years; 96 (83.5%) boys;19 (16.5%) girls]. Fifty-six (48.7%) participants were bystanders. The injuries were caused mainly due to bangers (n = 47; 40.9%), rockets in bottle (n = 28; 24.3%), firecrackers (n = 27; 23.5%), and nonspecific reasons (n = 13; 11.3%). The children had presented with various severity levels: corneal abrasion (n = 52; 44.4%); cataract (n = 47;40.2%); penetrating injury (n = 40; 34.2%); secondary glaucoma (n = 22;18.8%); subluxated lens (n = 19;16.2%); limbal stem cell deficiency (n = 14;12.0%); Iridodialysis (n = 12;10.3%), and vitreous hemorrhage (n = 11;9.4%). Management interventions of the eyes under study included: penetrating injury repair (n = 40; 34.2%), lens removal plus intraocular lens implantation (n = 26; 22.2%), removal of foreign body (n = 9; 7.7%). The BCVA after six months was 20/20 to 20/60 in 49 (41%) cases; 20/70 to 20/200 in 27 (23.1%) cases; < 20/200 to 20/400 in 7 (6%) cases, and < 20/400 in 34 (29.1%) of the cases. Out of 51.3% eyes with < 20/200 before management, only 35% recorded severe visual impairment. Fireworks-related eye injuries were mainly observed in boys primarily due to the use of bangers. Visual disability remained in one-third of the managed cases.
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.