ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Visual Acuity in Aniridia and WAGR Syndrome.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic and Epigenetic Drivers of Wilms Tumor Predisposition in Russian Pediatric Patients: A Multicenter Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Pediatric WAGR Patient with Aniridia-associated Glaucoma: A Case Report.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Ahmed Glaucoma Valve in Aniridia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Analysis of Phenotypes Associated with Deficiency of PAX6 Haplotypes in Chinese Aniridia Families.Current medical science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Our purpose was to evaluate visual acuity in aniridia subjects and the more severely affected phenotype in WAGR syndrome subjects, and to assess potential impact on visual function. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study of 25 aniridia subjects with nonsense mutations of PAX6 (50 eyes) and 25 WAGR syndrome subjects with large deletion mutations involving PAX6 (50 eyes). Aniridia subjects were age- and gender-matched with WAGR syndrome subjects in the Coordination of Rare Diseases at Sanford (CoRDS) database. Best-corrected ETDRS visual acuity measurements were converted to LogMAR visual acuity values, which were used to perform statistical analyses. Results: The age and gender distribution of the subjects was not statistically significantly different. The mean LogMAR values in aniridia and WAGR syndrome subjects were 0.95±0.53 and 1.51±0.99, respectively (P<0.001). In the better-seeing eye, mean LogMAR values were 0.78±0.15 in aniridia subjects and 1.40±0.88 in WAGR syndrome subjects (P=0.001). The mean LogMAR values for the better-seeing eye corresponded to Snellen visual acuity of 20/125 in aniridia subjects and 20/500 in WAGR syndrome subjects. This average visual acuity was worse than the threshold for profound visual impairment (WHO criteria) and legal blindness (AAO criteria) in WAGR syndrome but not in aniridia subjects. In analysis of both eyes, the visual efficiency was 34% in aniridia subjects and 2% in WAGR syndrome subjects. Conclusion: Visual acuity was significantly worse in WAGR subjects with multi-gene deletion mutations compared with aniridia subjects with nonsense mutations, which corresponded to differences in standard visual function thresholds. Our results suggest that visual acuity may indicate severity of ocular involvement and variability of phenotype in aniridia and WAGR syndrome.
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.