ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2022
Diagnostic Error in Neuro-ophthalmology: Avenues to Improve.
Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of ophthalmology residents in emergency department consultations: trends and potential implications for training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Review
- Introducing the pictogram-based ocular motor and visual-perceptual symptom scale: a multinational, cross-cultural feasibility study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Neuro-ophthalmology in the United Kingdom: providing a sustainable, safe and high-quality service for the future.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- A Deep Learning System for Automated Quality Evaluation of Optic Disc Photographs in Neuro-Ophthalmic Disorders.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo highlight potential avenues to reduce preventable diagnostic error of neuro-ophthalmic conditions and avoid patient harm. RECENT
findingsRecent prospective studies and studies of patient harm have advanced our understanding. Additionally, recent studies of fundus photography, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence highlight potential avenues for diagnostic improvement. Diagnostic error of neuro-ophthalmic conditions can often be traced to failure to gather an adequate history, perform a complete physical exam, obtain adequate/appropriate neuroimaging, and generate a complete, appropriate differential diagnosis. Improving triage and identification of neuro-ophthalmic conditions by other providers and increasing access to subspecialty neuro-ophthalmology evaluation are essential avenues to reduce diagnostic error. Further research should evaluate the relationship between misdiagnosis and patient harm, and help identify the most impactful potential targets for improvement.
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.