SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2025
Evaluation of parafoveal region and foveal avascular zone in inactive Grave's ophthalmopathy using optical coherence tomography angiography: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate macular microvascular changes measured by optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) in patients with inactive Graves’ ophthalmopathy (GO) compared with healthy controls by performing a meta-analysis of published studies.
methodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed through August 2025 according to PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were original peer-reviewed studies comparing OCTA macular vessel density (VD) parameters or foveal avascular zone (FAZ) area between inactive GO patients (clinical activity score < 3) and healthy controls, with means and standard deviations reported. Extracted outcomes included foveal VD, parafoveal VD, parafoveal temporal/superior/nasal/inferior VD, and FAZ area. Effect sizes were calculated as Hedges’ g with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran’s Q and I2; fixed or random effects models were applied accordingly. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s test.
resultsSix studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 433 eyes from inactive GO patients and 380 eyes from healthy controls. Meta-analysis found no significant differences between inactive GO patients and controls for: foveal VD (Hedges’ g = 0.040, 95% CI=[− 0.121 to 0.201], p = 0.628, I2 = 0%), parafoveal VD (Hedges’ g = 0.044, 95% CI=[− 0.357 to 0.445], p = 0.830, I2 = 73.5%), parafoveal temporal VD (Hedges’ g = 0.063, 95% CI=[− 0.212 to 0.337], p = 0.656, I2 = 70%), parafoveal superior VD (Hedges’ g = 0.043, 95% CI=[− 0.293 to 0.380], p = 0.801, I2 = 80%), parafoveal inferior VD (Hedges’ g = 0.176, 95% CI=[− 0.132 to 0.585], p = 0.263, I2 = 76%), parafoveal nasal VD (Hedges’ g = − 0.043, 95% CI=[− 0.334 to 0.246], p = 0.775, I2 = 73.3%), and FAZ area (Hedges’ g = 0.248, 95% CI=[− 0.207 to 0.703], p = 0.286, I2 = 70.2%). Egger’s tests did not indicate significant publication bias for the analyzed outcomes. Moderate to high heterogeneity was observed for most parameters except foveal VD.
conclusionThis meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in macular VD and FAZ area between inactive GO patients and healthy controls. The absence of differences suggests that macular microvascular alterations in GO may be associated primarily with active inflammatory disease and may normalize in inactive stages, or that macular VD is not a sensitive biomarker for inactive disease.
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.