ArticlePloS one2025
Comparing visual outcomes of nAMD treatment during and after the COVID-19 restrictions period.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MAIN
objectiveCompare treatment outcomes of newly diagnosed neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) during and after the COVID-19 restrictions.
methodsThis retrospective study at the Retina Group of Washington analyzed nAMD patients treated with anti-VEGF therapy with ≥ 12 months of follow-up. Two groups were identified: 258 subjects diagnosed between March 2020-March 2022 (Group 1) and 376 subjects diagnosed after (Group 2). Primary outcomes were 12-month and final best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and number of injections in the first 12 months.
resultsInitial mean BCVA was 20/71 and 20/68 in Group 1 and Group 2, with median BCVA of 20/60 and 20/50, respectively. At 12 months, mean BCVA improved to 20/65 and 20/54 in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p = 0.086). Final mean BCVA was 20/76 for Group 1 and 20/58 for Group 2 (p = 0.010). The mean change in LogMAR BCVA from the time of conversion to last follow-up was + 0.03 for Group 1 and -0.08 for Group 2 (p = 0.007). Group 1 had fewer injections in the first year of therapy (8.67 vs. 9.21, p = 0.004). 38.8% of Group 1 reached BCVA ≥20/40 at 12 months, versus 48.9% for Group 2 (p = 0.011).
conclusionPatients diagnosed during the COVID-19 restrictions period had worse visual outcomes than those diagnosed thereafter. Multiple factors, including, but not limited to reduced treatment frequency, likely contributed to worse visual outcomes.
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.