ArticleScientific reports2022
Distinct characteristics of central serous chorioretinopathy according to gender.
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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pregnancy as a risk factor for central serous chorioretinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Pooled it
- Prevalence and associations of central serous chorioretinopathy in a population aged 50+ years. The Beijing Eye Study.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Familial Occurrence of a Severe Phenotype of Central Serous Chorioretinopathy in Two Brothers.Cureus · 2024Article
- Genetic and Clinical Characteristics of Central Serous Chorioretinopathy With Steroid Use.Cureus · 2024Article
- Gender differences in central serous chorioretinopathy based on the new multimodal imaging classification.Eye (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Multi-Polymorphism Analysis Reveals Joint Effects in Males With Chronic Central Serous Chorioretinopathy.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the differences in clinical and genetic characteristics between males and females with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC). Consecutive 302 patients (mean age; 56.3 ± 11.7, male/female: 249/53) with CSC were evaluated on the initial presentation. All CSC patients underwent fluorescein angiography and indocyanine green angiography (FA/ICGA), swept-source or spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT), and fundus autofluorescence (FAF) to confirm a diagnosis. All patients were genotyped for rs800292 and rs1329428 variants of CFH using TaqMan technology. On the initial presentation, female patients were significantly older (p = 2.1 × 10
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.