ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Enhancing Molecular Diagnostic Accuracy in Genetic Eye Disorders Through a Personalized Re-Evaluation Strategy.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2026. 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.
- Molecular Diagnostic Yield and Genotype-Phenotype Spectrum of Inherited Eye Diseases in a Tertiary Health Center in Türkiye.Beyoglu eye journal · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Although genetic testing is crucial to provide prognostic information in genetic eye disorders (GEDs), up to 35% of cases remain unsolved after testing. We aim to describe how a tailored re-evaluation strategy, using up-to-date molecular testing, case-by-case review, and integration of in silico tools may increase the diagnostic yield. Methods: A total of 988 individuals from 800 families evaluated at the largest Portuguese GED referral center (Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra) were included. All had a clinical diagnosis based on clinical findings and deep phenotyping and underwent genetic testing. Targeted re-evaluation included updated Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) panels, Exome Sequencing (ES) reanalysis, and assays for intronic variants, copy number variants, and ORF15-RPGR region. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were reassessed using segregation studies, literature/database review, and bioinformatic tools. Results: Initial testing yielded a molecular diagnosis in 475 families (59.4%). Variant reclassification enabled 39 additional diagnoses. A personalized re-testing strategy resolved 43 more, either through updated NGS panels (11), ES-reanalysis (14) and identification of deletions, GC-rich, and intronic variants (22). Overall, the solved rate increased from 59.4% to 70.1%. An additional 45 families (5.6%) carry phenotype-consistent VUS that could not be reclassified at the present date (partially-solved cases). Conclusions: This personalized re-evaluation strategy, incorporating state-of-the-art genetic testing, evidence-based variant reclassification, and case review by a multidisciplinary team increased the solved rate by over 10%. Consequently, 86 additional families received a definitive diagnosis and accurate genetic counseling, underscoring the impact of periodic re-evaluation and continuous improvement in genetic testing methodologies.
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.