ArticleBMJ open2024
Which glaucoma patients should be monitored at home and exploration of clinician perceptions on home monitoring? a survey of glaucoma specialists in the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Implementation and Clinical Application of 24-Hour Intraocular Pressure Monitoring in China: A Nationwide Survey.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify suitable patients for glaucoma home monitoring and explore clinicians' perceptions of the possible benefits and risks of home monitoring within the National Health Service.
designAn online survey composed of open-ended and closed-ended questions.
settingSecondary care.
participantsGlaucoma specialists registered with the UK and Eire Glaucoma Society. OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement with clinical scenarios.
resultsThe estimated response rate was 68% (n=49). Of 49 participants, 92% (n=45) were consultant ophthalmologists and 71% (n=35) had over 10-year experience. There was a poor agreement regarding an ideal glaucoma patient for home monitoring, with only one scenario achieving over 60% agreement. Most participants believed that home monitoring would be most suitable for low-risk scenarios, rather than high-risk, due to fear of missing progression. In relation to acceptability, key facilitators included the potential to increase healthcare capacity and promote patient safety. However, low clinician trust in equipment reliability and fear of patient harm were reported as concerns.
conclusionsThere was no clear consensus on which patients would benefit most from glaucoma home monitoring. While many clinicians believe home monitoring may enhance healthcare, there were also many concerns about the technologies themselves. Further work to address clinician concerns is warranted. RESEARCH REGISTRY REGISTRATION NUMBER: 6213.
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.