ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2022
Etiological and Clinical Features of Contact Lens-Associated Microbial Keratitis.
Article in Turkish journal of ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infectious Keratitis: A Tertiary Center's Approach to Diagnosis, Management, and Enhanced Outcomes Through Microbiological Analysis.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Contact lens-related keratitis due to an emerging pathogenOman journal of ophthalmologyArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the demographic, etiological, microbiological, and clinical characteristics and present treatment results of contact lens (CL)-associated microbial keratitis (CLAMK). Materials and Methods: Medical records of patients who were followed in our clinic for CLAMK between January 2014 and May 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic characteristics, symptom duration, CL and usage characteristics, risk factors, isolated microorganisms, lesion characteristics, hospital stay, recovery and follow-up times, and best corrected visual acuities (BCVA) at first and last examination were recorded. Results: The 22 patients (16 females, 6 males; 22 eyes) had a mean follow-up time of 13.0±18.3 months and mean age of 26.9±14.3 years. Most of the female patients (13/16) were under 35 years old. At least one risk factor associated with improper CL usage was identified in 21 patients (95.4%). The most common risk factor was sleeping with CL (n=15, 68.1%). Causative microorganisms were detected on microbiological examination in 15 cases (68.1%). The most common microorganism was Conclusion: Mistakes in CL use are a frequent predisposing factor in patients with CLAMK. Informing CL users in detail about CL usage and cleaning may reduce the frequency of these mistakes and thus infections. Current antibiotic options that should be preferred in empirical treatment remain largely effective against likely pathogens. Favorable visual outcomes can be obtained in most cases with detailed diagnostic examination and appropriate treatment approaches.
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.