Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39117358›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2024

Central corneal thickness and the risk of primary open-angle glaucoma: a Mendelian randomisation mediation analysis.

Andreas Katsimpris, Sebastian-Edgar Baumeister, Hansjörg Baurecht, Andrew J Tatham, Michael Nolde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Andreas KatsimprisDepartment of Ophthalmology, Princess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5805-105X
Sebastian-Edgar BaumeisterInstitute of Health Services Research in Dentistry, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Hansjörg BaurechtDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Andrew J TathamDepartment of Ophthalmology, Princess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0372-3100
Michael NoldeInstitute of Health Services Research in Dentistry, University of Münster, Münster, Germany nolde@uni-muenster.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6893-7367

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe association of central corneal thickness (CCT) with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) remains uncertain. Although several observational studies assessing this relationship have reported an inverse association between CCT and POAG, this could be the result of collider bias. In this study, we leveraged human genetic data to assess through Mendelian randomisation (MR) the effect of CCT on POAG risk and whether this effect is mediated by intraocular pressure (IOP) changes.

methodsWe used 24 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with CCT (p value<5×10

resultsMR analysis suggested a positive association between CCT and POAG (OR of POAG per 50 µm increase in CCT: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.61; p value<0.01). MR mediation analysis showed that 28.4% of the total effect of CCT on POAG risk was mediated through changes in IOP. The primary results were consistent with estimates of pleiotropy-robust MR methods.

conclusionContrary to most observational studies, our results showed that a higher CCT is associated with an increased risk of POAG.

Indexed as

CorneaGenome-Wide Association StudyGlaucoma, Open-AngleIntraocular PressureMendelian Randomization AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideAgedCorneal PachymetryFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsCorneaGeneticsGlaucoma

Identifiers

PMID39117358
PMCPMC11672028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.