Corneal Endothelial Cell Density in Normal Tension Glaucoma Compared to Healthy Controls.

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.

1. Long-term corneal endothelial cell loss after filtration surgery: analysis using natural language processing.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
   Article
2. Relationship between Central Corneal Thickness and Endothelial Cell Density in Individuals with Primary Glaucoma and the General Population Living at High Altitudes.Journal of current ophthalmology
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as