ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2017
Variations in Treatment Delivery for Patients with Neovascular AMD in the UK: Results from an Ophthalmology Trainee Clinical Research Network Study.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trainee research network (TRN): a potential global model for promoting research training and outputs among trainees.Eye (London, England) · 2022Article
- Confidence of UK Ophthalmology Registrars in Managing Posterior Capsular Rupture: Results from a National Trainee Survey.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Article
- Collaborative research in ophthalmology: the way forward?Eye (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to determine treatment delivery patterns for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) across the UK through an ophthalmology trainee research network delivered observational study.
methodsData were collected via an online tool by potential research collaborators identified by the Ophthalmology Trainee Clinical Trial Network (OCTN). Collaborators were asked to comment on periprocedural practices of treatment of nAMD in their eye unit including treatment location and injectors, clinical assessment and routine observation in patients undergoing intravitreal treatment.
resultsData were available from 26 units around the United Kingdom. Survey methodology refinement was approximately 3 months, and the average response time was 4.9 ± 2.4 days. The majority of responders confirmed that treatment was undertaken as a "one-stop" service (n = 15, 58%), delivered in a clean room (n = 23, 88%). In the majority of units, doctors administered injections (n = 24, 92%), but significant treatment was also given by nurse injectors (n = 21, 81%). All collaborators reported that patients underwent visual acuity testing and optical coherence tomography imaging at all visits, but other imaging including fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) did not take place in all cases (n = 17, 65%) and only at baseline visit.
conclusionsThese results demonstrate the feasibility of conducting ophthalmology trainee led and delivered observational studies. Our results show that FFA is not routinely used in the diagnosis of nAMD in the units sampled; most injections are carried out in a clean room, and ophthalmic nurses delivering injections is a highly prevalent model of care in the UK.
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.