ArticleDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2005
["Do you have a remedy for macular degeneration?" A field study about the advice given on dietary supplementation in 60 German pharmacies].
Article in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Vitamins for the eyes? Risks and opportunities for physician and patient].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2009Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSince completion of the AREDS study, evidence has accumulated to suggest that some form of dietary supplementation may be of value in special individuals who are at risk of progressive age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). We wanted to find out which of the many supplements available are recommended in practice and which instructions, promises, and purchasing arguments are used by German pharmacies.
methodsA blinded consultation following a standardized protocol was carried out in 60 pharmacies.
resultsIn 36 pharmacies specific products for dietary supplementation were recommended, but the dosage never complied with the AREDS study, and in 24 pharmacies, the necessity for a medical examination or consultation with an ophthalmologist was not mentioned. Possible interactions with other drugs or side effects were generally excluded.
conclusionsPotential risks of supplement intake were underestimated. Medical knowledge of the most frequent cause of blindness in the Western world was insufficient. A clear policy of recommendations according to evidence-based criteria is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.