ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2022
The effect of a video tutorial to improve patients' keratoconus knowledge - a randomized controlled trial and meta-analysis of published reports.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How effective are video animations as information tools for patients and the general public? An updated systematic review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate whether a video tutorial, highlighting important aspects of keratoconus provided prior to a scheduled follow-up consultation, has a specific effect on patients' knowledge after the consultation. Methods and Analysis: Single center, randomized controlled trial registered on ISRCTN registry (number ISCTN75317089, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN75317089). Consenting eligible keratoconus patients were randomly assigned to either receive a conventional face-to-face consultation (control group) or to an additional video tutorial (interventional group) on definition, risk factors and treatment options provided prior to the consultation. The main outcome measure was the difference of knowledge assessed by a questionnaire after the consultation. Of each participant, clinical characteristics, highest educational level and medical background were obtained. We also performed a meta-analysis of published reports assessing knowledge improvement by video-based patient education. Results: We assigned 22 patients to the interventional and 21 patients to the control group. Mean age was 29.0 years (SD 11.6), 8/43 (18.6%) were female and median disease duration was 2.5 years (interquartile range: 2-5years). Compared to the control group, knowledge was 12.0% (95%CI: 5.8%-18.2%; p<0.001) higher in the interventional group. Subjects with a university degree scored 6.8% (95%CI: 3.8%-13.3%; p=0.038) higher. There was no interaction between video information and university degree. Other parameters were not associated with patient knowledge. The meta-analysis of 566 subjects enrolled in 6 studies revealed a standardized mean difference in favor of video-based education of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.30-0.64; p<0.004). Conclusion: The results suggest that supplementary video information embedded in the clinical management of keratoconus, helps conveying relevant disease knowledge.
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.