ReviewEye (London, England)2020
Montgomery in, Bolam out: are trainee surgeons 'material risks' when taking consent for cataract surgery?
Review in Eye (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correspondence on: a model for anterior vitrectomy in real patients: simulation for practical training.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Challenge of achieving truly individualised informed consent in therapeutic endoscopy.Frontline gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Material risk: vitreoretinal surgery, evisceration, enucleation and sympathetic ophthalmia-where are we currently?Eye (London, England) · 2023Review
- Only eye study 3 (OnES 3): a qualitative study into how surgeons approach surgery in patients with only one seeing eye.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Comment on: Montgomery in, Bolam out: are trainee surgeons 'material risks' when taking consent for cataract surgery?Eye (London, England) · 2022Article
- Real-time artificial intelligence evaluation of cataract surgery: A preliminary study on demonstration experiment.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trainee involvement in cataract surgery is vital to allow proper training of the next generation of ophthalmic surgeons. However, recent changes in the UK Law, coupled with open publication of National Cataract Dataset results, lead us to conclude that the status of being a trainee is itself a material risk that now needs to be divulged to patients during the consent process. The opinions of current trainee surgeons in the UK were sampled via questionnaire and clinical negligence counsel was involved in the authorship of the paper in order to analyse the legal issues at stake. Attitudes towards consent regarding trainee involvement in UK cataract surgery need to change.
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.