Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36161844›Full record

ReviewBMJ open ophthalmology2022

Reasons why we might want to question the use of patching to treat amblyopia as well as the reliance on visual acuity as the primary outcome measure.

Robert F Hess

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Dynamic Stereopsis Is Abnormal in Treated Anisometropic Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Risk of recurrence after cessation of dichoptic, binocular treatment of amblyopia.Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The effect of amblyopia on balance and gait.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Robert F HessDepartment Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada robert.hess@mcgill.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3324-2845

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that the primary deficit in amblyopia is loss of binocular vision and that the loss of monocular acuity is a secondary consequence. This new understanding derived from recent laboratory studies questions the present therapy and its primary acuity-based endpoint, which have been the gold standard in the treatment of this condition for the past 200 years.

Indexed as

AmblyopiaHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareSensory DeprivationVision, BinocularVisual AcuityChild health (paediatrics)PsychophysicsPublic healthRehabilitationTreatment MedicalVision

Identifiers

PMID36161844
PMCPMC9121476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.