ReviewEye (London, England)2023
Consensus statement for metastatic surveillance of uveal melanoma in Scotland.
Review in Eye (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systemic Surveillance Guidelines for Uveal Melanoma: A Systematic Review.Clinical & experimental ophthalmologyPooled it
- Hepatic metastasis surveillance in uveal melanoma: a retrospective cohort study from a UK tertiary centre (2006-2022).British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ophthalmic treatments are successful in managing uveal melanomas achieving good local control. However, a large number still metastasise, primarily to the liver, resulting in mortality. There is no consensus across the world on the mode, frequency, duration or utility of regular liver surveillance for metastasis and there are no published protocols. The Scottish Ocular Oncology Service (SOOS) constituted a Scottish Consensus Statement Group (SCSG) which included ocular oncologists, medical oncologists, radiologists and a uveal melanoma patient as a lay member. This group carried out an extensive review of literature followed by discussions to arrive at a consensus regarding surveillance planning for posterior uveal melanoma patients in Scotland. The Consensus Statement would provide a framework to guide each patient's surveillance plan and provide all patients with clarity and transparency on the issue. The SCSG was unable to find adequate evidence on which to base the strategy. The consensus statement recommends a risk-stratified approach to surveillance for these patients dividing them into low to medium-risk and high-risk groups defining the mode and duration of surveillance for each. It supplements the UK-wide Uveal Melanoma National Guidelines and allows a more uniform consensus-based approach to surveillance in Scotland. It has been adopted nationally by all health care providers in Scotland as a guideline and is available to patients on a publicly accessible website.
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.