Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26909513›Full record

ReviewAdvances in therapy2016

24-h Efficacy of Glaucoma Treatment Options.

Anastasios G P Konstas, Luciano Quaranta, Banu Bozkurt, Andreas Katsanos, Julian Garcia-Feijoo, Luca Rossetti, Tarek Shaarawy, Norbert Pfeiffer, Stefano Miglior

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Anastasios G P Konstas1st University Department of Ophthalmology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. konstas@med.auth.gr.
Luciano QuarantaGlaucoma Unit, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Banu BozkurtDepartment of Ophthalmology, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.
Andreas KatsanosDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Julian Garcia-FeijooUniversity of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Luca RossettiEye Clinic, San Paolo Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Tarek ShaarawyGlaucoma Sector, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Norbert PfeifferUniversity of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Stefano MigliorDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Bicocca of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki · GRJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DESelçuk University · TRUniversidad Europea de Madrid · ESUniversity of Brescia · ITUniversity of Geneva · CHUniversity of Ioannina · GRUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Milano-Bicocca · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current management of glaucoma entails the medical, laser, or surgical reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) to a predetermined level of target IOP, which is commensurate with either stability or delayed progression of visual loss. In the published literature, the hypothesis is often made that IOP control implies a single IOP measurement over time. Although the follow-up of glaucoma patients with single IOP measurements is quick and convenient, such measurements often do not adequately reflect the untreated IOP characteristics, or indeed the quality of treated IOP control during the 24-h cycle. Since glaucoma is a 24-h disease and the damaging effect of elevated IOP is continuous, it is logical that we should aim to understand the efficacy of all treatment options throughout the 24-h period. This article first reviews the concept and value of diurnal and 24-h IOP monitoring. It then critically evaluates selected available evidence on the 24-h efficacy of medical, laser and surgical therapy options. During the past decade several controlled trials have significantly enhanced our understanding on the 24-h efficacy of all glaucoma therapy options. Nevertheless, more long-term evidence is needed to better evaluate the 24-h efficacy of glaucoma therapy and the precise impact of IOP characteristics on glaucomatous progression and visual prognosis.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementGlaucomaIntraocular PressureDisease ProgressionHumansTime FactorsTonometry, OcularTreatment OutcomeVision Disorders24-h efficacy24-h intraocular pressure controlCircadian intraocular pressure characteristicsDiurnal intraocular pressureGlaucoma therapy optionsIntraocular pressure monitoringOphthalmology

Identifiers

PMID26909513
PMCPMC4846688
OpenAlexW2282194174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.