ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Gender-based analysis of visual and refractive characteristics in exotropia.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze gender-based differences in visual acuity, refractive error, angle of deviation, and amblyopia in patients with alternate exotropia (Alt XT) and intermittent exotropia (IXT).
methodA retrospective study of 4,417 surgical exotropia patients (2,970 Alt XT; 1,447 IXT) compared sex-based differences in CDVA, refraction, deviation angles, and amblyopia within each subtype. Alongside unadjusted tests, subtype-specific multivariable models were used: linear regression for right-eye logMAR CDVA (adjusting for age, near/distance deviation, spherical equivalent, and astigmatism), linear regression for distance deviation angle (adjusting for age, spherical refractive error, astigmatism, and amblyopia status), and binary logistic regression for amblyopia (yes/no) (adjusting for age, distance deviation, spherical refractive error, and astigmatism). An ordinal model for amblyopia severity was explored but interpreted cautiously due to sparse data.
resultsIn Alt XT, females had higher mean cylindrical error (0.86 ± 1.23 D vs. 0.76 ± 1.07 D; p = 0.024), while males had larger horizontal deviations at near (37.2 ± 16.6Δ vs. 35.0 ± 16.6Δ; p < 0.001) and distance (35.9 ± 16.0Δ vs. 34.3 ± 15.8Δ; p = 0.008) and a higher prevalence of severe amblyopia (12.2% vs. 7.8%; p < 0.001). In IXT, females were younger (16.7 ± 11.6 vs. 18.8 ± 11.9 years; p = 0.001), whereas males had larger deviations at near (28.1 ± 11.7Δ vs. 26.2 ± 10.0Δ; p = 0.001) and distance (28.4 ± 11.4Δ vs. 27.2 ± 9.8Δ; p = 0.025) and higher overall amblyopia prevalence (13.0% vs. 8.7%; p = 0.010), mainly mild (10.4% vs. 7.0%; p = 0.031). CDVA and spherical equivalent did not differ by sex in either subtype. In adjusted models, sex was not associated with right-eye logMAR CDVA in Alt XT (B = 0.005; p = 0.814) or IXT (B = 0.005; p = 0.506). Sex was associated with a small difference in distance deviation magnitude in Alt XT (B = 1.33 prism diopters; p = 0.018) but not in IXT (p = 0.114). In adjusted logistic regression, sex was not associated with amblyopia prevalence in Alt XT (OR = 1.12; p = 0.159) but was associated in IXT (OR = 1.51; p = 0.025).
conclusionGender-specific differences were observed in astigmatism, deviation magnitude, age at surgery, and amblyopia patterns across exotropia subtypes. After adjustment, sex remained associated with distance deviation in Alt XT and amblyopia prevalence in IXT, but not with CDVA in either subtype. Overall, sex appears to be a relevant clinical variable in exotropia and should be considered in assessment and future research.
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.