Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32455341›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology. Glaucoma

Identifying outcomes that are important to patients with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma: a qualitative interview study.

Jimmy T Le, Kareshma Mohanty, Amanda K Bicket, Michelle E Tarver, Malvina Eydelman, Tianjing Li

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology. Glaucoma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jimmy T LeDepartment of Epidemiolog, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kareshma MohantyDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Maryland.
Amanda K BicketDepartment of Ophthalmology, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Michelle E TarverOffice of the Center Director, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Malvina EydelmanDivision of Ophthalmic and Ear, Nose and Throat Devices, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, White Oak, Maryland, USA.
Tianjing LiDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USUnited States Food and Drug Administration · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BIOSTATISTICS OF AGINGT32AG000247 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Karen J. Bandeen-Roche · 1996 to 2026
$13.2M
Maximizing Use of High-Quality Evidence in Eye Care: Cochrane Eyes and Vision US ProjectUG1EY020522 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Tianjing Li · 2017 to 2026
$10.1M
FDA HHS U01 FD005942NEI NIH HHS UG1 EY020522NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000247
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To explore patients' perspectives and experiences living with glaucoma and identify important benefits and risks that patients consider before electing for new glaucoma treatments, such as minimally invasive glaucoma surgical (MIGS) devices. Design: Semi-structured, in-person qualitative interviews with patients seen at the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute. Participants: Adults older than 21 years of age who were suspected or diagnosed with ocular hypertension or mild to moderate primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) (and thus eligible for treatment with a MIGS procedure) presenting to a glaucoma clinic in Baltimore, Maryland, between May and December 2016. Method: We conducted in-person interviews with patients recently diagnosed with ocular hypertension or POAG. We focused on considerations patients take into account when deciding between different treatments. We used the framework approach to code and analyze the qualitative data. Considerations of special interest to us were those that can be translated into outcomes (or endpoints) in clinical trials. Main outcome measures: Patients' perspectives concerning outcomes that matter to them when managing ocular hypertension or POAG. Results: Ten male and fifteen female patients participated in our study. The median participant age was 69 years (range 47 - 82 years). We identified outcomes that patients expressed as important, which we grouped into four thematic categories: (1) limitations in performing specific vision-dependent activities of daily living; (2) problems with general visual function or perceptions; (3) treatment burden, including ocular adverse events; and (4) intraocular pressure (IOP). All 25 participants expressed some concerns with their ability to perform vision-dependent activities, such as reading and driving. Most (23/25) participants had an opinion about IOP, and among those currently taking ocular hypotensive eye drops, all recognized the relationship between eye drops and IOP. Conclusion: We have identified outcomes that matter to patients who are deciding between different treatments for ocular hypertension and POAG, such as the ability to drive or maintain mobility outside the home. These outcomes will be important in future evaluations of new treatments for glaucoma.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingVisual AcuityAgedAged, 80 and overAntihypertensive AgentsFemaleGlaucoma, Open-AngleHumansIntraocular PressureMaleMiddle AgedOcular HypertensionRetrospective StudiesVisual FieldsAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID32455341
PMCPMC7243613
OpenAlexW2965585302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.