ArticleScientific reports2021
Assessment of the conjunctival microcirculation for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction compared to healthy controls.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Topology-preserving, diameter-specific framework for conjunctival vessel segmentation and tortuosity analysis in diabetes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Towards noninvasive blood count using a deep learning pipeline from bulbar conjunctiva videos.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Conjunctival Venular Hemodynamic Biomarkers in Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- AI-integrated ocular imaging for predicting cardiovascular disease: advancements and future outlook.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Appraisal of Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Biomarkers, and Ocular Imaging in Cardiovascular Risk Prediction.Current cardiology reviews · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microcirculatory dysfunction occurs early in cardiovascular disease (CVD) development. Acute myocardial infarction (MI) is a late consequence of CVD. The conjunctival microcirculation is readily-accessible for quantitative assessment and has not previously been studied in MI patients. We compared the conjunctival microcirculation of acute MI patients and age/sex-matched healthy controls to determine if there were differences in microcirculatory parameters. We acquired images using an iPhone 6s and slit-lamp biomicroscope. Parameters measured included diameter, axial velocity, wall shear rate and blood volume flow. Results are for all vessels as they were not sub-classified into arterioles or venules. The conjunctival microcirculation was assessed in 56 controls and 59 inpatients with a presenting diagnosis of MI. Mean vessel diameter for the controls was 21.41 ± 7.57 μm compared to 22.32 ± 7.66 μm for the MI patients (p < 0.001). Axial velocity for the controls was 0.53 ± 0.15 mm/s compared to 0.49 ± 0.17 mm/s for the MI patients (p < 0.001). Wall shear rate was higher for controls than MI patients (162 ± 93 s
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.