Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39632989›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2025

The history of uveitis: from antiquity to the present day.

Nima Ghadiri

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Current perspective on infectious uveitis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

1 author.

Nima GhadiriDepartment of Ophthalmology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK. nima.ghadiri@nhs.net.ORCID 0000-0001-5591-2419

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This comprehensive review traces the historical understanding and treatment of uveitis from ancient civilisations to modern medicine, a history which reflects the evolution of medical understanding and practice in general. Early descriptions of ocular inflammation appear in Egyptian medical papyri from 1700 BCE, with subsequent contributions from Greek and Roman physicians, including Hippocrates and Galen, who provided foundational observations of ocular inflammatory conditions. Medieval scholars in the Middle East, particularly Avicenna, preserved and advanced classical knowledge while recognising the systemic nature of ocular inflammation. The Renaissance and Enlightenment periods brought anatomical precision and the emergence of ophthalmology as a distinct specialty, notably through innovations such as Helmholtz's ophthalmoscope in 1851. The twentieth century marked a paradigm shift with the evolution of immunological understanding, leading to the recognition of autoimmune mechanisms and genetic predispositions in uveitis. The introduction of corticosteroids mid-century revolutionised treatment, followed by the development of steroid-sparing immunomodulatory agents and, more recently, targeted biological therapies. Contemporary advances in imaging technology and the establishment of international collaborative groups have standardised classification and treatment approaches. This historical perspective demonstrates the progression from empirical observations to precision medicine in uveitis, highlighting the importance of understanding this evolution for advancing future therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

OphthalmologyUveitisHistory, 15th CenturyHistory, 16th CenturyHistory, 17th CenturyHistory, 18th CenturyHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHistory, AncientHistory, MedievalHumans

Identifiers

PMID39632989
PMCPMC11794655

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.