ArticleTransactions of the American Ophthalmological Society2007
How effectively does medical care achieve its purposes? Evaluation of peer-reviewed literature in ophthalmology related to wellness.
Article in Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society, 2007. 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.
- Intrastromal corneal ring implants for corneal thinning disorders: an evidence-based analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo get an idea of whether the issue of what makes people healthier is studied in ophthalmology by determining the proportion of articles dealing with that subject.
methodsProspective review of all articles published in 3 consecutive issues of 7 peer-reviewed ophthalmology journals, using a grading system in which A signified an article that clearly dealt with a subject expected to have an impact on health or quality of life, or that considered health or quality of life itself directly; B indicated an article similar to A, but not directly concerned with the issue of health; C signified an article similar to B but more distantly related to health or quality of life; and D was the grade given when there was no relationship at all to health or quality of life. Grading was done independently by 3 graders. A literature review on the subject was also performed.
resultsThirty-three articles received a grade of A, 229 of B, 740 of C, and 81 of D. There were more articles that had no relationship at all to health or quality of life than there were articles dealing directly with those issues.
conclusionsOn the basis of a review of the literature and of over 1000 articles, ophthalmologists do not appear to give much priority to issues of quality of life or health. How validly these conclusions can be generalized to general clinicians is not known.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18427612PMC2258106What 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.