SynthesisEye (London, England)2011
Patient-reported outcomes (PRO's) in glaucoma: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments Relevant to Glaucoma.Journal of glaucoma · 2026Pooled it
- Latanoprost/timolol fixed-dose combination: two decades of efficacy and safety in glaucoma management.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond intraocular pressure: introducing a novel glaucoma-specific PROM for evaluating outcomes after IStent inject implantation combined with phacoemulsification cataract surgery.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Exploring patient-reported outcomes to assess progress in inpatient low vision rehabilitation.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Quality of life in patients with progressive keratoconus treated with corneal collagen crosslinking.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Efficiency, Precision, Validity, and Reliability of GlauCAT-Asian Computerized Adaptive Tests in Measuring Glaucoma-Related Quality of Life.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Challenging the "Topical Medications-First" Approach to Glaucoma: A Treatment Paradigm in Evolution.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- The development of a glaucoma-specific health-related quality of life item bank supporting a novel computerized adaptive testing system in Asia.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Integrating Spinal Cord Injury - Quality of Life instruments into rehabilitation: Implementation science to guide adoption of patient-reported outcome measures.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2021Article
- A Review of Studies of the Association of Vision-Related Quality of Life with Measures of Visual Function and Structure in Patients with Glaucoma in the United States.Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2021Review
- The Computerized Glaucoma Visual Function Test: A Pilot Study Evaluating Computer-Screen Based Tests of Visual Function in Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
- Practical Barriers to Medication Adherence: What Do Current Self- or Observer-Reported Instruments Assess?Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Review
- Advanced glaucoma at diagnosis: current perspectives.Eye (London, England) · 2020Review
- The impact of primary open-angle glaucoma: Comparison of vision-specific (National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25) and disease-specific (Glaucoma Quality of Life-15 and Viswanathan 10) patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
- The use of patient-reported outcome research in modern ophthalmology: impact on clinical trials and routine clinical practice.Patient related outcome measures · 2019Review
- Usage of glaucoma-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the Singapore context: a qualitative scoping exercise.BMC ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Association of Glaucoma-Related, Optical Coherence Tomography-Measured Macular Damage With Vision-Related Quality of Life.JAMA ophthalmology · 2017Article
- Quality of Life in Glaucoma: A Review of the Literature.Advances in therapy · 2016Review
- Association between progressive retinal nerve fiber layer loss and longitudinal change in quality of life in glaucoma.JAMA ophthalmology · 2015Article
- Dutch-Flemish translation of 17 item banks from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS).Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2014Article
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
The aim of this review was to summarize literature in view of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for glaucoma and provide guidance on how outcomes are best assessed based on evidence about their content and validity. A systematic literature review was performed on papers describing the developmental process and/or psychometric properties of glaucoma or vision-specific PRO-instruments. Each of them was assessed on their adherence to a framework of quality criteria. Fifty-three articles were identified addressing 27 PRO-instruments. In all, 18 PRO's were developed for glaucoma and 9 for diverse ophthalmologic conditions. Seven instruments addressed functional status, 11 instruments quality of life and 9 instruments disease and treatment-related factors. Most of the instruments demonstrated only partially adherence to predefined quality standards. The tools for assessing functional status were of poor quality, while the Glaucoma Quality of Life Questionnaire and the Vision Quality of Life Index were well-developed QoL measures, yet only validated using classical techniques. The Rasch-scaled QoL-tools, IVI and VCM1 need to improve their item-content for glaucoma patients. The questionnaires to measure adherence should improve their validity and the Treatment Satisfaction Survey for Intra Ocular Pressure pops out as the highest quality tool for measuring topical treatment side effects. This review revealed that most PRO-instruments demonstrated poor developmental quality, more specifically a lack of conceptual framework and item generation strategies not involving the patients' perspective. Psychometric characteristics were mostly tested using classical validation techniques.
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.