Trial reportBMC medical research methodology2011
Developing the clinical components of a complex intervention for a glaucoma screening trial: a mixed methods study.
Trial report in BMC medical research methodology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study: a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing primary medical treatment with primary trabeculectomy for people with newly diagnosed advanced glaucoma-study protocol.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2018Trial
- Development and evaluation of Order of Magnitude (OM): a virtual reality-based visual field analyzer for glaucoma detection.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Neuroprotection in Glaucoma: NADCells · 2021Review
- Biomarkers for glaucoma: from the lab to the clinic.Eye (London, England) · 2017Article
- Optimisation of complex health interventions prior to a randomised controlled trial: a scoping review of strategies used.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2016Article
- Gaps in Glaucoma care: A systematic review of monoscopic disc photos to screen for glaucoma.Expert review of ophthalmology · 2014Article
- Is it worthwhile to conduct a randomized controlled trial of glaucoma screening in the United Kingdom?Journal of health services research & policy · 2014Article
- The NHS Act of 1951; is it time to re-act?Eye (London, England) · 2013Article
- Developing the specifications of an open angle glaucoma screening intervention in the United Kingdom: a Delphi approach.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- Preventing blindness: seeing is believing.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2012Article
- Evidence base for an intervention to maximise uptake of glaucoma testing: a theory-based cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2012Article
- Magnitude and determinants of glaucoma in type II diabetics: A hospital based cross-sectional study in Maharashtra, India.Oman journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Designing a Screening Program for Prevention of Avoidable Blindness in Iran through a Participatory Action Approach.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlaucoma is a leading cause of avoidable blindness worldwide. Open angle glaucoma is the most common type of glaucoma. No randomised controlled trials have been conducted evaluating the effectiveness of glaucoma screening for reducing sight loss. It is unclear what the most appropriate intervention to be evaluated in any glaucoma screening trial would be. The purpose of this study was to develop the clinical components of an intervention for evaluation in a glaucoma (open angle) screening trial that would be feasible and acceptable in a UK eye-care service.
methodsA mixed-methods study, based on the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for complex interventions, integrating qualitative (semi-structured interviews with 46 UK eye-care providers, policy makers and health service commissioners), and quantitative (economic modelling) methods. Interview data were synthesised and used to revise the screening interventions compared within an existing economic model.
resultsThe qualitative data indicated broad based support for a glaucoma screening trial to take place in primary care, using ophthalmic trained technical assistants supported by optometry input. The precise location should be tailored to local circumstances. There was variability in opinion around the choice of screening test and target population. Integrating the interview findings with cost-effectiveness criteria reduced 189 potential components to a two test intervention including either optic nerve photography or screening mode perimetry (a measure of visual field sensitivity) with or without tonometry (a measure of intraocular pressure). It would be more cost-effective, and thus acceptable in a policy context, to target screening for open angle glaucoma to those at highest risk but for both practicality and equity arguments the optimal strategy was screening a general population cohort beginning at age forty.
conclusionsInterventions for screening for open angle glaucoma that would be feasible from a service delivery perspective were identified. Integration within an economic modelling framework explicitly highlighted the trade-off between cost-effectiveness, feasibility and equity. This study exemplifies the MRC recommendation to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in developing complex interventions. The next step in the development pathway should encompass the views of service users.
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.