ReviewTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Central visual field in glaucoma: An updated review.
Review in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of General-Purpose Vision Language Models and Ophthalmology Foundation Models in Glaucoma Detection and Function Prediction.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Changes in Quality of Life Among Glaucoma Patients Following Six Months of Niacinamide Supplementation.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Diagnostic challenges in high myopia: identification of sight-threatening complications and the role of artificial intelligence.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Advancing glaucoma care with big data and artificial intelligence innovations.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evaluation of central vision in glaucoma is important due to its impact on patients' quality of life and activities of daily living such as reading, driving, and walking. The 10-2 visual field (VF) assessment remains a mainstay in the functional analysis of central vision in glaucoma diagnosis and progression. However, it may be underutilized in clinical practice. Monitoring of disease progression especially in advanced cases, glaucoma evaluation in certain ocular disorders such as high myopia, disc hemorrhage, low corneal hysteresis, and certain optic disc phenotypes, as well as earlier detection of central VF damage, are certain conditions where additional monitoring with the 10-2 pattern may provide complementary clinical information to the commonly utilized 24-2 pattern. In addition, the development of artificial intelligence techniques may assist clinicians to most effectively allocate limited resources by identifying more risk factors to central VF damage. In this study, we aimed to determine specific patient characteristics that make central VF damage more likely and to assess the benefit of incorporating the 10-2 VF in various clinical settings.
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.