ReviewWorld journal of experimental medicine2026
Corneal nerve imaging in systemic neuropathy: A minireview of experimental and precision medicine applications.
Review in World journal of experimental medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Small-fiber neuropathy is a common complication of metabolic, neurodegenerative, and treatment-related disorders. Early detection can be challenging because established diagnostic approaches may be invasive, resource-intensive, or relatively insensitive to early small-fiber injury. Corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) is a rapid, noninvasive imaging technique that enables quantitative assessment of the corneal subbasal nerve plexus and has been proposed as a biomarker of peripheral small-fiber damage. This minireview critically evaluates the role of CCM for early detection, diagnostic testing, prognostic stratification, longitudinal follow-up, and treatment response assessment in systemic neuropathies, particularly diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Evidence is strongest in DPN, in which CCM consistently demonstrates group-level corneal nerve loss; however, individual diagnostic performance is only moderate and varies according to patient spectrum, reference standard, sampling protocol, analysis method, and diagnostic threshold. Evidence in other neurologic diseases, including Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, is less robust. Advancements in automated image analysis and artificial intelligence have improved reproducibility and efficiency of corneal nerve quantification in recent years. Nevertheless, widespread implementation in the clinics is still hampered by methodological heterogeneity, lack of full standardization, and absence of universally validated diagnostic and prognostic cut-off points. CCM is therefore a promising tool for translational research and precision medicine, but population-level differences in corneal nerve parameters should not be interpreted as establishing an individual diagnosis. At present, CCM should complement rather than replace established clinical, neurophysiological, functional, and pathological assessments, including quantitative sensory testing and skin biopsy when clinically indicated. Before integration into clinical practice can be recommended, multi-center prospective studies utilizing standardized acquisition and analysis protocols, validated thresholds, and clinically meaningful patient outcomes are required.
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.