ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2022
Evidence-Based Medicine in the Field of Ophthalmology during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the evolution of COVID-19 related publications in the field of ophthalmology. Methods: All articles published in the field of ophthalmology and relevant to COVID-19 were identified by conducting a search on PubMed and Scopus databases using the string ((ophthalmology) OR (eye) OR (ocular)) AND ((corona) OR (COVID-19) OR (pandemic)). Search was conducted on September 30, 2020. Each eligible publication was independently graded by two experienced ophthalmologists based on the level of evidence-based medicine (EBM), with scores ranging from 1 (the highest level of EBM) to 5 (the lowest level). The average level of EBM was also evaluated for each month from February through September. Finally, we analyzed the interval (in days) between submission and acceptance for publication as well as the percentage of manuscripts that required revision before being accepted. Results: Our search yielded a total of 425 relevant publications. Of these publications, 359 (84.5%), 59 (13.9%), and 7 (1.6%) were rated as level 5, 4, and 3, respectively; none of the publications was rated as level 1 or 2. From February 2020 through September 2020, we found a significant increase in the relative proportion of level 3 and 4 publications compared to level 5 publications (rho = 0.108, Conclusions: In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, primarily lower-level EBM articles were published, and these publications were accepted relatively quickly. However, this effect was temporary, and over time the EBM levels improved and the interval between submission and acceptance increased, indicating an increase in publication standards.
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.