Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28730427›Full record

ReviewDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2017

[Basic research in ophthalmology in Germany and its international context].

U Schlötzer-Schrehardt, C Cursiefen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

U Schlötzer-SchrehardtUniversitätsaugenklinik Erlangen, Erlangen, Deutschland.
C CursiefenZentrum für Augenheilkunde, Universität zu Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Köln, Deutschland. Claus.Cursiefen@uk-koeln.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExperimental basic research provides the foundations for the elucidation of pathophysiological mechanisms of diseases and the development of novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for ophthalmological diseases. The objective of this contribution is to provide an overview of the international interconnection of basic research in ophthalmology in Germany.

methodsThe international context of ophthalmological research conducted in Germany is presented by means of personal experiences and data published by the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG), the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the European Union (EU). Due to the lack of organized databases this article lays no claim to completeness.

resultsBasic research in ophthalmology in Germany is mainly conducted in university eye departments and is mainly related to the etiology, pathophysiology and therapy development for various ophthalmic diseases. It is primarily funded by the DFG, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the EU plays an increasingly important role. Thus, ophthalmological research is integrated into numerous European research networks and beyond that into many international interconnections and relationships.

conclusionIn Germany, both clinical and basic research in ophthalmology is integrated into many international networks and is only functionally viable in an international context; however, given the increasing impact of ophthalmological research in Asian countries, future strategies require a continued focus on career development, research infrastructure, working environment and international cooperation.

Indexed as

International CooperationBiomedical ResearchEuropean UnionEye DiseasesGermanyHumansOphthalmologySocieties, MedicalEtiologyEye diseasesFundingResearch networkTherapy development

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.