ArticleEye (London, England)2012
The Cataract National Dataset electronic multi-centre audit of 55,567 operations: risk indicators for monocular visual acuity outcomes.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 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
38 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combined phacoemulsification surgery and intravitreal triamcinolone injection versus stand-alone surgery in patients with type 2 diabetes: a prospective randomized trial.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Trial
- Evaluation of a uniplanar pupil expansion ring in small-pupil cataract surgery: a feasibility study.International ophthalmology · 2022Trial
- Cataract surgery in the context of age-related macular degeneration: challenges and considerations.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Review
- Exploring the impact of pupil expansion techniques on cataract surgery: unveiling key complications and clinical outcomes: a comparative analysis of 1266 eyes.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- The Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: Report 17, a risk factor model for posterior capsule rupture.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Eight-Chop Technique in Phacoemulsification Using Iris Hooks for Patients with Cataracts and Small Pupils.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Refractive Outcomes After Cataract Surgery-The Impact of Preoperative Visual Acuity, the Intraocular Lens Model, and the Surgeon's Experience: An Empirical Analysis of Hungarian and Kosovan Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A model for anterior vitrectomy in real patients: Simulation for practical training.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Visual function loss in fungal sphenoid sinusitis: clinical characteristics and outcomes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- How old is too old for routine cataract surgery?Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- The effect of ethnicity on anatomic success following macular hole surgery: a multicentre cohort study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- Surgeon effects on cataract refractive outcomes are minimal compared with patient comorbidity and gender: an analysis of 490 987 cases.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- OCT Assisted Quantification of Vitreous Inflammation in Uveitis.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Cataract surgery risk stratification in phacoemulsification and manual small incision cataract surgery in a teaching hospital.International ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Cataract Surgery in Very Old Patients: A Case-Control Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Management of Cataract in Patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Improvement in Activities of Daily Living after Cataract Surgery in the Very Old.Annals of clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
- Diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular oedema pathways and management: UK Consensus Working Group.Eye (London, England) · 2020Review
- Going paperless: improved cataract surgery outcome data quality in a new fully electronic unit.Eye (London, England) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo report risk factors for visual acuity (VA) improvement and harm following cataract surgery using electronically collected multi-centre data conforming to the Cataract National Dataset (CND).
methodsRoutinely collected anonymised data were remotely extracted from the electronic patient record systems of 12 participating NHS Trusts undertaking cataract surgery. Following data checks and cleaning, analyses were performed to identify risk indicators for: (1) a good acuity outcome (VA 6/12 or better), (2) the pre- to postoperative change in VA, and (3) VA loss (doubling or worse of the visual angle).
resultsIn all, 406 surgeons from 12 NHS Trusts submitted data on 55,567 cataract operations. Preoperative VA was known for 55,528 (99.9%) and postoperative VA outcome for 40,758 (73.3%) operations. Important adverse preoperative risk indicators found in at least 2 of the 3 analyses included older age (3), short axial length (3), any ocular comorbidity (3), age-related macular degeneration (2), diabetic retinopathy (3), amblyopia (2), corneal pathology (2), previous vitrectomy (2), and posterior capsule rupture (PCR) during surgery (3). PCR was the only potentially modifiable adverse risk indicator and was powerfully associated with VA loss (OR=5.74).
conclusionRoutinely collected electronic data conforming to the CND provide sufficient detail for identification and quantification of preoperative risk indicators for VA outcomes of cataract surgery. The majority of risk indicators are intrinsic to the patient or their eye, with a notable exception being PCR during surgery.
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.