Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37562863›Full record

ArticleBMJ case reports2023

Potential cost of assumptions within a visual assessment.

Chloe Shipton, Kanna Ramaesh, David Lockington

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Chloe ShiptonOphthalmology, Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Glasgow, UK chloe.shipton3@nhs.scot.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1720-9823
Kanna RamaeshOphthalmology, Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Glasgow, UK.
David LockingtonOphthalmology, Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We report a man in his 80s who described sudden unilateral loss of vision, resulting in extensive urgent investigations by the accident and emergency department team. Subsequent evaluation of visual acuity with pinhole demonstrated significant improvement, triggering further questioning. It transpired that he was mistakenly wearing his wife's glasses, which accounted for his visual symptoms. This case illustrates the importance of a stepwise approach to visual assessment, and avoiding assumptions, as using the simple pinhole test could have avoided extensive investigations and their subsequent costs.

Indexed as

EyeglassesSexual BehaviorHumansMaleVisual AcuityPrimary CareVisual pathway

Identifiers

PMID37562863
PMCPMC10423796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.