ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2021
Medical Schools' Ophthalmology Course: An Appraisal by Ophthalmology Residents.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2021. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ophthalmology education and systemic disease integration in Syrian medical schools: a cross-sectional assessment of knowledge gaps.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating the impact of undergraduate ophthalmology education on medical students' competency in eye care: a cross-sectional study in Jordan.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Knowledge and attitude of medical students towards artificial intelligence in ophthalmology in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Terson Syndrome Diagnosed by Ocular Point of Care Ultrasound on the Medical Floor.POCUS journal · 2024Article
- Article
- Ophthalmology as a career choice among medical students: a survey of students at a Canadian medical school.BMC medical education · 2022Article
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the perception and satisfaction of ophthalmology residents with the currently provided ophthalmology curricula to medical students.
methodsA cross-sectional survey involving first to fourth year ophthalmology residents (N = 106) from all regions of Saudi Arabia was conducted between December 2018 and February 2019. An online questionnaire explored opinions about the ophthalmology course regarding three dimensions. Firstly, adequacy in covering essential parts of the specialty; secondly, improvements required; and thirdly, effectiveness. A score (0-21) was calculated, indicating the overall suitability of the ophthalmology course. In addition, factors of good overall suitability (score ≥10) were analyzed.
resultsRegarding adequacy, respondents opined that the ophthalmology course did not reasonably cover the basic part (35.8%), clinical part (61.3%), common disease (26.4%), and emergencies (39.6%). Concerning improvements required, more than 80% of the participants expressed that the course required to be improved for all its features, including duration (80.2%), objectives (85.8%), content (82.1%), organization (83.0%), and supervision (81.1%). As to effectiveness, half of them deemed the course unhelpful in familiarizing general practitioners with common ophthalmic diseases and emergencies. Overall, the ophthalmology course was generally deemed suitable (score ≥10) for only 27.4% of the participants, with no differences across gender, level, or region.
conclusionOphthalmology residents perceived multiple deficits in the current Saudi ophthalmology teaching course. Significant improvements in ophthalmologic curricula are required, besides coping with unprecedented technological advancement in the ophthalmological field.
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.