ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2024
European Glaucoma Society research priorities for glaucoma care.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glaucoma management across 13 countries in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: an exploratory survey.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Quality indicators to ensure excellence in glaucoma care: the GlauCCare Spanish consensus.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2025Article
- The UK clinical eye research strategy: refreshing research priorities for clinical eye research in the UK.Eye (London, England) · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe goal of health research is to improve patients care and outcomes. Thus, it is essential that research addresses questions that are important to patients and clinicians. The aim of this study was to develop a list of priorities for glaucoma research involving stakeholders from different countries in Europe.
methodsWe used a three-phase method, including a two-round electronic Delphi survey and a workshop. The clinician and patient electronic surveys were conducted in parallel and independently. For phase I, the survey was distributed to patients from 27 European countries in 6 different languages, and to European Glaucoma Society members, ophthalmologists with expertise in glaucoma care, asking to name up to five research priorities. During phase II, participants were asked to rank the questions identified in phase I using a Likert scale. Phase III was a 1 day workshop with patients and clinicians. The purpose was to make decisions about the 10 most important research priorities using the top 20 priorities identified by patients and clinicians.
resultsIn phase I, 308 patients and 150 clinicians were involved. In phase II, the highest-ranking priority for both patients and clinicians was 'treatments to restore vision'. In phase III, eight patients and four clinicians were involved. The top three priorities were 'treatments to stop sight loss', 'treatments to restore vision' and 'improved detection of worsening glaucoma'.
conclusionWe have developed a list of priorities for glaucoma research involving clinicians and patients from different European countries that will help guide research efforts and investment.
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.