Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35552499›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2022

nAMD: optimization of patient care and patient-oriented information with the help of an internet-based survey.

Anke Schmid, Felicitas Bucher, Erika Liczenczias, Sara Maslanka Figueroa, Bettina Müller, Hansjürgen Agostini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Opportunities to Improve Management of Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration: Communication at Diagnosis and Beyond : Insights from the German nAMD Barometer Survey.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Anke SchmidEye Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Felicitas BucherEye Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Erika LiczencziasNovartis Pharma GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany.
Sara Maslanka FigueroaNovartis Pharma GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany.
Bettina MüllerNovartis Pharma GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany.
Hansjürgen AgostiniEye Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. hansjuergen.agostini@uniklinik-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0331-1109

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis survey was conducted to identify factors that influence how patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) deal with their disease and information that are considered useful from a patient's point of view.

methodsA total of 5035 patients with nAMD living in Germany were interviewed via internet-based cross-sectional survey, where the following information was collected: personal data, disease awareness, and patients' needs. In addition, a Quality of Life questionnaire (SF-12v2) could be completed.

resultsOut of the 5035 participants, more males than females participated (55% vs 45%), and most participants were in the age groups 76 to 85 years (37%) and 66 to 75 years (35%). Seventy-three percent of patients rated their understanding of the disease as at least sufficient, and more than two-thirds of the patients (68%) were aware that their disease needs to be controlled on a regular basis and treated on an "as needed" basis. Regarding potential risk factors for AMD, most participants were aware of age (89%), but only 39% of hereditary load and 33% of smoking as evidence-based risk factors, indicating a need for further information. The doctor remains the major source of information (93%), with internet (29%), brochures (14%), opticians (13%), or patient support groups (4%) with only limited contribution. Distance to the treatment center was identified as one of the factors, which had the greatest influence on patients' compliance. A "treat as needed" regime turned out to be the preferred control and treatment schedule in contrast to a "fixed appointment" every 4 weeks.

conclusionThis internet-based survey appears to be representative for nAMD patients. To increase patients' compliance, proximity to the treatment center and a "treat as needed" regime turned out to be important factors as well as patients' awareness of their disease. In this regard, the reported desire for more information indicates that patients' knowledge still needs to be improved. Our results will help to further optimize patient care and patient-oriented information.

Indexed as

Macular DegenerationAgedAged, 80 and overAngiogenesis InhibitorsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInternetMalePatient CareQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesAngiogenesis InhibitorsAge-related macular degenerationInternet-basednAMDQuality of LifeSF-12v2Survey

Identifiers

PMID35552499
PMCPMC9477947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.