ArticlePloS one2020
Factors associated with visual outcomes after cataract surgery: A cross-sectional or retrospective study in Liberia.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Improving the refractive outcomes of cataract surgery.Community eye health · 2025Article
- Poor visual outcome and associated factors among patients underwent cataract surgery at Debre Markos and Felege Hiwot comprehensive specialized hospitals, Northwest Ethiopia, 2023.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparison of cataract surgery outcomes between a secondary and a tertiary eye hospital in Tamil Nadu, India.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Factors Influencing Visual Improvement after Phacoemulsification Surgery among Malaysian Cataract Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Towards a Connected Mobile Cataract Screening System: A Future Approach.Journal of imaging · 2022Review
- People to policy: The promise and challenges of big data for India.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo report the initial outcomes and associated risk factors for poor outcome of cataract surgery performed in Liberia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: LV Prasad Eye Institute (LVPEI), Hyderabad, started providing eye care in Liberia since July 2017. Electronic Medical Records of 573 patients operated for age-related cataract from July 2017 to January 2019 were reviewed. One eye per patient was included for analysis. All patients underwent either phacoemulsification or manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS). Pre and postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were recorded at one day, 1-3 weeks and 4-11 weeks. Main outcome measure was BCVA at 4-11 weeks; Intraoperative complications and preoperative ocular comorbidities (POC) were noted. BCVA less than 6/12 was classified as visual impairment (VI). Risk factor for VI was analysed using the logistic regression model.
resultsOf the 573 patients, 288 were males and 285 were females (49.7%). Mean age was 65.9±10.9 years; 14.3% had POC. The surgical technique was mainly MSICS (94.59%, n = 542). At 4-11 weeks, good outcome of 6/12 or better was noted in 38.55% (UCVA) and 82.54% (BCVA). Visual acuity (VA) of 6/18 or better as UCVA and BCVA was noted in 63.5% and 88% eyes respectively. Poor outcome of less than 6/60 was noted as UCVA (11.11%) and BCVA (5.22%). Multivariable analysis showed poor visual outcomes significantly higher in patients with POC (odds ratio 3.28; 95% CI: 1.70, 6.34).
conclusionThe cataract surgical outcomes in Liberia were good; with ocular comorbidities as the only risk factor.
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.