Table of Contents
2018; Elsevier BV; Volume: 195; Linguagem: Inglês
10.1016/s0002-9394(18)30559-2
ISSN1879-1891
AutoresJayne Weiss, Hans Ulrik Møller, Walter Lisch, Kimberly Tran, Stephen M. Schwartz, William Smiddy, Harry Flynn, Yuanbo Liang, Junhong Jiang, Wen Ou, Xianyao Peng, Ruizhu Sun, Xiang Xu, Juanyuan Yang, Cheng Hu, Cong Ye, Nathan Congdon, Fan Lu, John Chen, Eoin P. Flanagan, Jiraporn Jitprapaikulsan, S Lo ́pez- Chiriboga, James P. Fryer, Jacqueline A. Leavitt, Brian Weinshenker, Andrew McKeon, Jan‐Mendelt Tillema, Vanda A. Lennon, W. Oliver Tobin, Brian Keegan, Claudia F. Lucchinetti, Orhun H. Kantarci, Collin M. McClelland, Michael Lee, Jeffrey L. Bennett, Victoria Xiii,
ResumoDiagnosis of the corneal dystrophies may challenge even a seasoned corneal dystrophy expert.Peer-reviewed publications have numerous errors, historical reliance on phenotype allows clinicians to know only what they think they already know, and the bar to publish ''a new corneal dystrophy'' has been set too low.The International Classification of Corneal Dystrophies can assist with accurate diagnosis.Criteria to improve rigor of publication standards prior to proposing a ''novel'' corneal dystrophy are presented.
Referência(s)