ArticleScientific reports2022
Binocular function in patients with intermittent exotropia accompanied by unilateral congenital ptosis.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical factors associated with impaired near stereoacuity in children and adolescents with intermittent exotropia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with intermittent exotropia (IXT) have a wide range of binocular deficits. This study aims to evaluate the effect of ptosis on the binocular function of patients with IXT. Clinical records of 45 IXT patients with congenital ptosis (IXT-ptosis group) and 58 age-matched IXT patients without ptosis (IXT only group) who presented for eye examination between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with amblyopia were excluded to rule out the effects of visual acuity on binocularity. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the magnitude of exodeviation at distance and at near, stereopsis, and office-based control scores at the first visit were reviewed. The binocular functions of the two groups were compared. The mean ± SD age of the overall patients was 6.6 ± 2.7 years. There were no significant differences in the distribution of age, sex, spherical equivalent refraction, or BCVA between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Although the office-based control scores at distance and near were slightly worse in the IXT-ptosis group, the differences were not statistically significant (at distance, 2.8 ± 1.87 vs. 2.2 ± 1.13, p = 0.08; at near, 1.8 ± 0.67 vs. 1.6 ± 0.74, p = 0.11). Furthermore, the IXT-ptosis group had worse stereopsis at distance (p = 0.01). There were no significant differences between the two groups in near stereopsis or exodeviation magnitude (p > 0.05). A larger proportion of patients had suppression on the Bagolini test in the IXT-ptosis group than in the IXT-only group (p = 0.04). The IXT-ptosis group had worse distance stereoacuity, and a larger proportion of patients had suppression on the Bagolini test than the IXT only group. In IXT patients, the presence of coexisting ptosis can have a further deleterious impact on binocular function.
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.