ArticleSeminars in ophthalmology2021
Evaluation of Available Online Information Regarding Treatment for Vitreous Floaters.
Article in Seminars in ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spontaneous remission of vision degrading myodesopsia of posterior vitreous detachment type.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the quality, content, and readability of information available online on vitreous floater information.
designCross-sectional study.
participantsNot applicable.
methodsWebsites were generated using a Google search of "vitreous floaters treatment" and "[State]" and were analyzed using a standardized checklist of 22 questions. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease score. Websites met qualification criteria if they represented U.S.-based institutions, if they provided clinical care and addressed vitreous floater treatment on their website.
resultsOf the 1,065 websites screened, 456 were included. Of these, 406 (89%) were private institutions, 24 (5.3%) were academic, and 26 (5.7%) were a combination of private and academic. The average readability score correlated to a 10th-12th grade reading level. Vitreous floater treatment was discussed on 283 (62.1%) websites and 63 (21.8%) websites discussed potential side effects. Google rank was inversely correlated with the depth of explanation (r = -0.114,
conclusionsOnline information about vitreous floater treatment is variable, and the material is at a higher than recommended reading level for health information. While treatment was discussed by nearly two thirds of websites, less than a quarter mentioned possible complications, and treatment recommendations varied significantly depending on physician training.
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.