ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2025
Revised Ocular Trauma Score (rOTS): to develop and internally validate a predictive model for visual outcomes after open globe injury.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to develop and validate a prognostic scoring model for predicting poor visual outcomes in patients with open globe injury (OGI).
designA retrospective cohort study of patients with OGI from two teaching hospitals in Thailand.
methods311 patients diagnosed with OGI between 2016 and 2023 were used to develop a multivariable logistic regression model predicting final visual acuity aimed at 6 months post-OGI. Visual outcomes were categorised into two groups using 20/200 as the cut-off for legal blindness. The model's performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Internal validation was conducted with bootstrapping for 500 replications.
results133 patients (42.77%) had visual acuity worse than 20/200 at the 6-month follow-up. The median follow-up time was 4.14 months, with an IQR of 3.00-11.74 months. Initial visual acuity (VA), relative afferent pupillary defect, rupture and eyelid injury were among the strongest predictors of visual outcome. Discrimination and calibration of the scoring model were satisfactory, with a C-statistic of 0.8671, a slope of 1 and a calibration-in-the-large of 0. Risk groups were created, categorised as mild, moderate and severe, with a C-statistic of 0.8094. The ORs for poor final VA (≤20/200) at 6 months were 1.51 (95% CI, 0.93 to 2.48) and 45.06 (95% CI, 11.20 to 387.94) in the moderate and severe risk groups, respectively.
conclusionsOur prognostic model (revised Ocular Trauma Score) can be seamlessly used in emergency settings to predict visual outcomes in patients presenting with OGI. Presenting visual acuity (VA) is the strongest predictor. Interpretation should be made with caution due to several limitations, including the predominance of severe cases inherent to a referral-based setting, the relatively small sample size and the absence of paediatric patients. External validation of our model is needed.
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.