ReviewCureus2024
Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Changes in Patients Diagnosed With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Severity Stratification of Coronary Artery Disease Using Novel Inner Ellipse-Based Foveal Avascular Zone Biomarkers.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomography angiography in systemic disease.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) parameters and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Two independent reviewers searched the electronic databases (MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Scopus, Embase (Excerpta Medica Database), Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) from inception until April 2023. According to the inclusion criteria of this review, eligible were observational studies, randomized control trials, and registry/database studies that included the eyes of adult ACS patients and assessed OCTA parameters within the macula. The pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) between patients diagnosed with ACS and healthy controls with a confidence interval (CI) of 95% were calculated using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects method. The heterogeneity was assessed by I
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.