ArticleScientific reports2022
Risk factors for visual field progression in newly diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma patients in Sweden.
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 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pre-Diagnostic Plasma Endogenous Steroids and the Risk of Exfoliation Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Pre-diagnostic plasma endogenous steroids and the risk of exfoliation glaucoma.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Burden of Pseudoexfoliation and Pigmentary Glaucoma among American Indian or Alaska Native Patients.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Visual Field Progression After Glaucoma Surgery in Pseudoexfoliation versus Primary Glaucoma.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to identify risk factors for visual field progression in newly diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma patients. Prospective nonrandomized cohort study. The study included patients with newly diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma. All patients were followed for at least 3 years with reliable visual fields. Both risk factors at inclusion and during the 3-year follow-up were considered. For inclusion, five reliable visual fields were needed. Exfoliation glaucoma was defined based on the European Glaucoma Society guidelines. Visual field evaluation was performed using the 24-2 strategy of Humphrey field analysis. Outcomes: Visual field progression. Three different approaches were used: mean deviation, visual field index, and guided progression analysis. Independent variables were tested first in a univariate linear or regression model. The significant variables were retested in a multivariate linear or logistic regression model. The results were different for the MD, VFI and GPA models. The only variable that showed a significant association in the three models was age (p = 0.004; p = 0.006; p = 0.04). Significant variables in the two models were IOP at diagnosis (p = 0.02; p = 0.04), IOP reduction in absolute terms (p = 0.006; p = 0.003), IOP reduction in relative terms (%) (p = 0.04; p = 0.009) and number of medicines (p = 0.02; p = 0.002). Significant variables in one model were family history (p = 0.04), smoking (p = 0.03), cataract surgery (p = 0.04) and SLT treatment (p ≤ 0.001). Exfoliation glaucoma is a fast progressive glaucoma. Age at diagnosis must be considered. Significant IOP reduction must be achieved to slow down progress in exfoliation glaucoma. The use of SLT treatment should be advised in exfoliation glaucoma patients.
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.