ArticleJournal of current glaucoma practice
Clinical Profile of Primary Open-angle Glaucoma Patients at an Eye Center in Nigeria.
Article in Journal of current glaucoma practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Globally, one of the leading causes of preventable blindness is primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). The study assessed the clinical presentations of POAG patients attending an eye center in Abuja, Nigeria. Materials and methods: Records of 188 eyes, collected from 94 patients diagnosed with POAG for a period of 1 year at the eye center, were reviewed. Clinical records, including age, gender, visual acuity (VA), central cornea thickness (CCT), intraocular pressure (IOP), cup-to-disk ratios, and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness of the participants, were extracted and analyzed. Results: The majority of the participants were males (56.4%) and adults (57.4%), most of whom had normal VA (>70% in each eye). Our analysis revealed normal average estimates of RNFL thickness, IOP, and CCT among the participants. Females had thicker RNFL compared to males ( Conclusion: Central cornea thickness (CCT), RNFL thickness, and IOP in isolation should not be used as early indicators for POAG; rather, a combination of these and other indices is recommended. Early detection through active screening and treatment in the community for at-risk groups is highly advised. How to cite this article: Ezinne NE, Kwarteng MA, Ekemiri KK,
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.