Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30725339›Full record

ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2019

Miniaturization in Glaucoma Monitoring and Treatment: A Review of New Technologies That Require a Minimal Surgical Approach.

H Burkhard Dick, Tim Schultz, Ronald D Gerste

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. [Treatment of secondary glaucoma following intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy with the XEN® gel stent and mitomycin C].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: What Do We Know? Where Should We Go?Translational vision science & technology · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

3 authors.

H Burkhard DickUniversity Eye Clinic, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Tim SchultzUniversity Eye Clinic, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Ronald D GersteUniversity Eye Clinic, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany. rdgerste@aol.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the management of glaucoma, recent and upcoming innovations have the potential to contribute to both the efficacy of intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring and the number of available treatment options. These new devices and procedures have two things in common: they are part of the trend in medicine towards miniaturization, and they require a limited surgical procedure to become effective. This review focuses on the Eyemate (Argos) intraocular sensor, which offers a new way to reliably measure 24 h IOP, and on intraocular sustained release systems for pharmacological glaucoma therapy. It also briefly reflects on the miniature implants currently used in minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS).

Indexed as

AdherenceCyPass microstentEyemate (Argos) sensorGlaucomaHydrus microstentIntraocular drug delivery systemsIntraocular pressure (IOP)iStent injectMinimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS)XEN gel

Identifiers

PMID30725339
PMCPMC6393261

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.