ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2023
Harnessing the potential of practice-based clinical optometry research in the United Kingdom.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- An evaluation of optometric advanced skills within a UK tertiary based setting.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Genetic testing and gene therapy in retinal diseases: Knowledge and perceptions of optometrists in Australia and New Zealand.Clinical genetics · 2024Article
- A cross-sectional study to assess the clinical utility of modern visual function assessments in patients with inherited retinal disease: a mixed methods observational study protocol.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Harnessing the potential of practice-based clinical optometry research in the United Kingdom.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Research is the core of evidence-based practice across all healthcare, in order to ensure optimum patient care. The College of Optometrists is a national standard setting institution for optometric practice in the United Kingdom. However, the standards are only as good as the available evidence, and currently there is little evidence relating directly to optometric practice. The National Institute of Health and Care Research, the General Medical Council and The College of Optometrists, amongst others, have published research strategies describing ambitious plans to expand the scope of healthcare research. The aim of this article is to raise awareness of these government initiatives and consider how they may relate to optometric practice. To improve optometrist research engagement, we need to address the barriers to research and implement strategies to overcome them. There are many opportunities to support research, with different degrees of involvement, from signposting patients to research studies, supporting recruitment or collecting data for a multicentre clinical trial, as well as undertaking an individual research project. Healthcare research is changing and there is scope for more practice-based research activities in optometry. Research should not be a solo endeavour but a multi-disciplinary effort. Greater collaborations across all stakeholders, including primary care, secondary care, academia, regulators and industry is needed to make this possible.
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.