ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Ethical Gaps in Ophthalmology in the United States.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To highlight gaps in the professional ethics of ophthalmology. Design: Perspective. Methods: Presentation of problematic cases in ophthalmologic ethics with juxtaposition of ethical, legal, and conscientious viewpoints informed by relevant literature. Results: What is legal, ethical, and conscientious overlap but are not identical. Professional ethical guidelines, when they exist, are stricter than what the law requires, but are silent on several contemporary controversies. Conscientious guidelines can vary from loosest to strictest as they apply to individuals with wide variability. The relationship of ophthalmology to society changes, and ethical guidelines lag for some of the interactions. Conclusion: The rules of ethics for ophthalmology need to be updated and evidence of activity and oversight made public. Failure to do so invites greater external regulation.
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.