ArticleSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
Management of traumatic corneal abrasion by a sample of practicing ophthalmologists in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic prophylaxis for corneal abrasion.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Antibiotic prophylaxis for corneal abrasion.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- [Treatment of traumatic corneal abrasion: results of a national survey among German ophthalmologists].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Potential of Honey and Propolis on Ocular Disease.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Diagnosis and Management of Corneal Abrasion Perception of (Primary Health Care Physicians and Emergency Physicians) and its Determinants in Saudi Arabia - A Survey.Middle East African journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCorneal epithelial defect (CED) is a common medical emergency condition involving loss of surface epithelial layer of the cornea. The aim of the study is to explore the practice patterns of ophthalmologists in management of traumatic CED in Saudi Arabia and to assess the variance in clinical practice from the established clinical practice guidelines.
methodsA Survey based study at King Abdulaziz University Hospital between March 2015 and January 2016. A survey of 16 relevant closed ended questions was distributed to 300 practicing ophthalmologists including Saudi Ophthalmology Society (SOS) members and non-members. The survey questionnaire focused on the known aspects of traumatic CED management.
results188 practicing ophthalmologists responded to the distributed questionnaire. That represents a 63% response rate for the present survey study. The age group most commonly affected by traumatic CED is 6-18 years old (61.2%). Fingernail trauma (n = 129, 68.6%) was the major cause of CED reported by respondents. In large CED (>5 mm) most common modality of treatment is pressure patching with topical antibiotics with or without cycloplegics (40.4%) whereas in small CED (<2 mm) topical antibiotics and cycloplegics is the preferred way (40.4%). The most commonly used prophylactic antibiotic was second-generation fluroquinolons (58.5%).
conclusionsPresent study demonstrates that practicing ophthalmologists are reporting that traumatic CED mostly affects young people and fingernail trauma is the major cause. There is lack of clear institutional guidelines and consensus on the management of traumatic corneal abrasions.
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.