ArticleScientific reports2025
Long term efficacy of recession and resection for abducens nerve palsy with targeting overcorrection of 5 prism diopters.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Strabismus surgery is required for some cases with abducens nerve palsy (ANP) without spontaneous resolution; however, whether the surgical corrective effect for ANP is similar to that of concomitant esotropia (ET) remains unclear. This study compared the 1-year surgical outcomes of recession and resection (RR) between patients with ANP (ANP group, 11 patients) and those with concomitant ET (ET group, 33 patients). The target angle of RR for ANP was added by 5 prism diopters (Δ) compared to concomitant ET. The 1-year corrective effect was relatively lower in the ANP group than in the ET group (2.1 ± 0.7 Δ/mm vs. 2.6 ± 0.6 Δ/mm, P = 0.07), but the 3-month effect was similar (2.3 ± 0.6 Δ/mm vs. 2.6 ± 0.6 Δ/mm, P = 0.31) because significantly larger drift occurred in the ANP group than in the ET group (2.3 ± 2.2 Δ vs. 0.2 ± 2.7 Δ, P = 0.03). Motor success at 1 year was achieved in 90.9% of patients in both groups. Our findings suggested that the target angle of RR was suitable to add by 5 Δ in patients with ANP compared to concomitant ET in order to maintain a long-term favorable ocular position.
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.