ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2022
Associations with visual acuity outcomes after 12 months of treatment in 9401 eyes with neovascular AMD.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Royal College of Ophthalmologists National Ophthalmology Database age-related macular degeneration (AMD) audit: report 1, associations with socio-economic deprivation in neovascular AMD.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Do Socioeconomic Inequalities Exist Within Ophthalmology and Orthoptics in the UK?: A Scoping Review.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo record visual acuity outcomes after 12 months of treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NvAMD), investigate variation between sites and explore associations with baseline characteristics and care processes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Anonymised demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records at treating National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. Associations with acuity outcomes were investigated using multivariate linear and logistic regression.
resultsAnalysis included 9401 eyes (7686 patients) treated at 13 NHS Trusts. From baseline to month 12, median acuity improved from LogMAR 0.50 (IQR 0.30-0.80) to 0.40 (0.22-0.74) and the proportion of eyes with LogMAR ≥0.3 increased from 34.5% to 39.8%. Baseline visual acuity was the strongest predictor of visual acuity outcomes. For each LogMAR 0.1 worsening of baseline acuity, the acuity at 12 months was improved by LogMAR 0.074 (95% CI 0.073 to 0.074) and the odds of a 'poor' acuity outcome was multiplied by 1.66 (95% CI 1.61 to 1.70). Younger age, independent living status, lower socioeconomic deprivation, timely loading phase completion and higher number of injections were associated with better acuity outcomes. Despite case-mix adjustments, there was evidence of significant variation in acuity outcomes between sites.
conclusionsEven after adjustment for other variables, variation in acuity outcomes after NvAMD treatment within the NHS remains. Meaningful comparison of outcomes between different providers requires adjustment for a range of baseline characteristics, not visual acuity alone. Identifying best practice at sites with better outcomes and adapting local care processes are required to tackle this health inequality.
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.