ReviewDie Ophthalmologie2023
[Awareness for glaucoma in the general population].
Review in Die Ophthalmologie, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Experiences of glaucoma patients : Evaluation of the survey conducted by the Federal Association Glaucoma Self-help and the DOG Glaucoma Section].Die Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- [Trabecular, suprachoroidal and subconjunctival innovative glaucoma surgery : S1 guidelines of the German Society of Ophthalmology (DOG) and the German Professional Association of Ophthalmologists (BVA)].Die Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- The Association of Polygenic Risk Score With Glaucoma and Its Related Traits: Results From Two German Population-Based Studies.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- [Open-angle glaucoma: Who is affected and what are the risk factors?]Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlaucoma is not a rare entity but because very few symptoms occur and visual field defects are frequently first recognized at a late stage, a large proportion of glaucoma diseases remain undetected. The aim of this study was to identify the proportion of undiagnosed glaucoma in German population-based cohort studies and to contextualize them in the context of the literature. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe prevalence of glaucoma in the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS) and the age-related investigations on health of the University of Regensburg (AugUR) was evaluated based on visual field examinations and optic disc color photography according to the ISGEO criteria. Furthermore, the self-reported glaucoma diagnoses were collected and the proportion of undiagnosed glaucoma was determined.
resultsThe proportion of undiagnosed glaucoma was 55% in the GHS, and 53% in the AugUR study. The results correlate with results from previous studies from other countries in which the proportion of unrecognized glaucoma ranged from 33% to 78%. In the GHS and the AugUR study the proportion of undiagnosed glaucoma was higher in younger age groups and in women. DISCUSSION: Roughly every second case of glaucoma is undetected. As the symptoms are often nonspecific or take a long time to appear, there is a risk of advanced glaucomatous visual field defects or blindness due to a lack of glaucoma awareness. Studies have shown that a systematic screening can halve this risk.
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.