ArticleScientific reports2025
The natural preferred retinal locus in patients with macular disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Letter to the Editor Re: "Preferred Retinal Locus in Juvenile Macular Dystrophy".Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the characteristics of the natural Preferred Retinal Locus (PRL) in eyes with different macular lesions. In this retrospective study, 37 patients (39 eyes) suffered from macular diseases (MD) were included, and the following data were collected: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), mean sensitivity of macular area in 10 deg diameter (MS), bivariate contour ellipse area (63% BCEA and 95% BCEA), fixation stability, and fundus images and sectional images of the fovea. A natural PRL did not develop in 10 eyes with macular disease. A total of 29 eyes developed natural PRLs: 42% developed superior PRLs, 17% developed temporal PRLs, 24% developed nasal PRLs, 7% developed multiple PRLs, 10% developed PRLs inside the "dark area", and there were no independent inferior PRLs. In the inside group, the mean MS was significantly lower than that of the other four groups; and the variations in log BCEA were greater in group M compared with group S (P < 0.01), group T (P < 0.01) and group N (P < 0.01), but there were no obvious differences among group S, group T and group N. A natural PRL tends to be more localized in the upper retina, possibly to preserve the lower visual field, followed by nasal and temporal, and rarely localized in the lower retina, and multiple scattered PRLs can be formed when the lesion was widespread. If the function of the fovea exists, even if the lesion in the macular area is clear, the patient still uses the fovea for central fixation and does not form PRL.
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.