Cited by 94Glaucoma and retinal disordersOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchDrug-Induced Ocular Toxicity

Mydriasis and glaucoma: exploding the myth. A systematic review

Open access
Pandit, R. J., Taylor, R.·2000·Diabetic Medicine

Abstract

Aims To investigate the risk of inducing acute glaucoma following mydriasis. Methods Systematic review of published research 1933-1999. Results The risk of inducing acute glaucoma following mydriasis with tropicamide alone is close to zero, no case being identified. The risk with long-acting or combined agents is between 1 in 3,380 and 1 in 20,000. The presence of chronic glaucoma constitutes no additional risk. Conclusions Mydriasis with tropicamide alone is safe even in people with chronic glaucoma. It should be advised in all patients when thorough retinal examination is indicated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2000.00368.x

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Reflexive dilation protocol introduces another step in the primary care workflow in addition to a small patient risk, requiring the operator to be comfortable performing the procedure and understand relevant contraindications, as well as accommodation for added visit time and ensuring patients have transportation means.

    “This introduces another step in the primary care workflow in addition to a small patient risk,62 requiring the operator to be comfortable performing the procedure and understand relevant contraindications, as well as accommodation for added visit time and ensuring patients have transportation means.”
  • In a retrospective review of 241 patients, Shou et al's predictive dilation model using type 1 diabetes, smoking, age, race, sex, and hypertension achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.76, with sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 68% at 50% cutoff value.

    “The model demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.76, with sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 68% at 50% cutoff value.45”
  • Some patient factors correlated to nondiagnostic image include type 1 diabetic mellitus, smoking, old age, and cataracts.

    “Some patient factors correlated to nondiagnostic image include type 1 diabetic mellitus, smoking, old age, and cataracts.45,49”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pandit, R. J., & Taylor, R.
Affiliations
Royal Victoria Infirmary (GB)
Corresponding author
Taylor, R.
Venue
Diabetic Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-10
Volume
17
Issue
10
Pages
693-699
ISSN
  • 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5491
OpenAlex
W2072138623
Cited by
94
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Glaucoma and retinal disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Drug-Induced Ocular Toxicity
Keywords
pupil dilation, acute glaucoma, tropicamide, cycloplegic agents, chronic glaucoma, retinal examination
MeSH terms
Glaucoma, Humans, Mydriatics, Risk Factors, Safety, Tropicamide, Mydriasis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review