Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33132077›Full record

Trial reportJournal of optometry

Investigation of the efficacy of an online tool for improving the diagnosis of macular lesions imaged by optical coherence tomography.

Paul Grace, Bruce J W Evans, David F Edgar, Praveen J Patel, Dhanes Thomas, Gerald Mahon, Alison Blake, David Bennett

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The quality, accuracy and appropriateness of UK optometric age-related macular degeneration referrals.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Paul GraceLondon South Bank University, UK; Institute of Optometry, London, UK. Electronic address: paul@graceandoneill.com.
Bruce J W EvansLondon South Bank University, UK; Institute of Optometry, London, UK.
David F EdgarDivision of Optometry and Visual Sciences, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Praveen J PatelNIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom.
Dhanes ThomasMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Gerald MahonOphthalmic Imaging Dept.,RVH, Belfast, UK.
Alison BlakeOptometrist, Bury St Edmunds, UK.
David BennettOptometrist, Brooks and Wardman, Nottingham, UK.
College of Optometrists · GBUniversity College London · GBCity, University of London · GBUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOptical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive method for diagnosis and monitoring of retinal (typically, macular) conditions. The unfamiliar nature of OCT images can present considerable challenges for some community optometrists. The purpose of this research is to develop and assess the efficacy of a novel internet resource designed to assist optometrists in using OCT for diagnosis of macular disease and patient management.

methodsAn online tool (OCTAID) has been designed to assist practitioners in the diagnosis of macular lesions detected by OCT. The effectiveness of OCTAID was evaluated in a randomised controlled trial comparing two groups of practitioners who underwent an online assessment (using clinical vignettes) based on OCT images, before (exam 1) and after (exam 2) an educational intervention. Participants' answers were validated against experts' classifications (the reference standard). OCTAID was randomly allocated as the educational intervention for one group with the control group receiving an intervention of standard OCT educational material. The participants were community optometrists.

resultsRandom allocation resulted in 53 optometrists receiving OCTAID and 65 receiving the control intervention. Both groups performed similarly at baseline with no significant difference in mean exam 1 scores (p = 0.21). The primary outcome measure was mean improvement in exam score between the two exam modules. Participants who received OCTAID improved their exam score significantly more than those who received conventional educational materials (p = 0.005).

conclusionUse of OCTAID is associated with an improvement in the combined skill of OCT scan recognition and patient management decisions.

Indexed as

OptometristsOptometryRetinal DiseasesHumansMacula LuteaTomography, Optical CoherenceClinical vignettesCommunity optometristsEducational interventionOptical coherence tomographyTraining

Identifiers

PMID33132077
PMCPMC8093527
OpenAlexW3096026458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.