Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38914721›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2024

Ocular vs neurosyphilis. are they the same? A guide to investigation and management.

Gerard A Reid, Gabor Michael Halmagyi, Claudia Whyte, Peter J McCluskey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. [Neurology in Bohemian Lights].Revista de neurologia · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
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

4 authors.

Gerard A ReidOphthalmology Department, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK. gerard.reid@icloud.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1738-7876
Gabor Michael HalmagyiDepartment of Neurology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Claudia WhyteDepartment of Infectious Diseases Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Peter J McCluskeySave Sight Institute, University of Sydney, Specialty of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reviews key concepts in the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis and management of ocular syphilis. It is not a systematic review or meta-analysis, but highlights the critical clinical features and investigations in patients with ocular syphilis. It reviews the overlap and interplay between ocular and neuro syphilis and provides practical guidance to diagnose and manage patients with ocular syphilis.

Indexed as

Eye Infections, BacterialNeurosyphilisAnti-Bacterial AgentsDiagnosis, DifferentialDisease ManagementHumansSyphilisSyphilis SerodiagnosisTreponema pallidumAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID38914721
PMCPMC11306553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.