ArticleTurkish journal of ophthalmology2025
Preferred Retinal Locus in Juvenile Macular Dystrophy.
Article in Turkish journal of ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Letter to the Editor Re: Preferred Retinal Locus in Juvenile Macular Dystrophy.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor Re: "Preferred Retinal Locus in Juvenile Macular Dystrophy".Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Reply.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate foveal lesion and preferred retinal locus (PRL) locations and their effects on visual acuity in juvenile macular dystrophy (JMD) patients. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 14 JMD patients (28 eyes) with bilateral central vision loss were examined using scanning laser ophthalmoscope/optical coherence tomography. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), dimensions and location of the macular lesion, PRL location, and PRL stability were evaluated. Results: Mean BCVA was 0.84±0.17 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution. PRL was superiorly located in 64.3% of eyes and nasally located in 35.7%. PRL location was significantly associated with patient age (r=0.541, p=0.002); nasally located PRLs were more common in younger patients (mean age 15.1±2.8 years) while superiorly located PRLs were more common in older patients (mean age 22.4±6.9 years). Superiorly located PRLs were significantly closer to the fovea than nasally located PRLs (p=0.014). Visual acuity worsened as lesion size increased and PRL-fovea distance increased. PRL-fovea distance was longer in younger patients and positively correlated with lesion dimensions and PRL-lesion distance. Conclusion: In JMD patients, PRLs are predominantly located superiorly or nasally. In younger patients, PRLs are typically located nasally and farther from the fovea, with poorer visual acuity compared to older patients. Cortical adaptation mechanisms may play a role in changing PRL location with age. Understanding PRL characteristics in JMD is crucial for developing effective low-vision rehabilitation strategies.
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.