Observational studyBMJ open ophthalmology2024
Characteristics of beta parapapillary atrophy in primary angle-closure suspect.
Observational study in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the characteristics of beta parapapillary atrophy (β-PPA) in patients with primary angle-closure suspect (PACS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In total, 215 and 259 eyes with PACS and non-PACS (NPACS), respectively, were enrolled in this observational, cross-sectional study. Stereoscopic fundus and optical coherence tomography images were used to characterise β-PPA; the former was also used to measure the major β-PPA parameters. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to identify the factors correlated with the presence of β-PPA and with β-PPA parameters.
resultsThe β-PPA occurrence rates were 48.80% and 44.40% in the PACS and NPACS groups, respectively, with no significant difference between groups. Compared with that in the NPACS group, the β-PPA area was significantly larger (p=0.005) in the PACS group, but the angular extent and maximum radial length did not differ between groups (p=0.110 and 0.657, respectively) after adjusting for age and axial length. The presence of β-PPA was associated with older age (OR 1.057, 95% CI 1.028 to 1.088, p<0.001) and larger disc area (OR 1.716, 95% CI 1.170 to 2.517, p=0.006). A larger β-PPA area was associated with older age (p=0.014), greater vertical cup-to-disc ratio (p=0.028), larger disc area (p<0.001) and PACS diagnosis (p=0.035).
conclusion48.80% of participants with PACS had β-PPA, which is slightly larger than NPACS. The area of β-PPA was larger in PACS, while the angular extent and maximum radial length did not differ between groups.
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.