ArticleEye (London, England)2025
Outcomes of immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgeries (ISBCS) performed by trainees vs consultants: a two-armed cohort study.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. 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.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare outcomes of Immediate Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgeries (ISBCS) performed by resident doctors versus consultant ophthalmologists at Moorfields Eye Hospital and its satellite centres.
methodsThe study reviewed ISBCS performed by phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implant, comparing resident ophthalmologists (Gr1) and consultant ophthalmologists (Gr2). Outcomes examined included complications, refraction (spherical equivalent (SE) > 0.5D and >1.0D from predicted target refraction), and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA logMAR) at three months post-ISBCS.
resultsThe study included 553 eyes in Gr1 and 687 in Gr2. UDVA post-surgery was similar in both groups (P = 0.26). Intra- and postoperative complications were comparable between groups [RR = 1.88 (95% CI 0.8; 4.2) P = 0.13]. We found no statistically significant difference in refractive outcomes between groups (Gr1 [-0.12 D (IQR -0.5; -0.25)] and Gr2 [-0.25D (IQR -0.63; -0.13)] (P = 0.08)). Similarly, no difference was found in patients with >1.0D SE predicted refractive outcome between groups (6% of Gr1 and 3.9% of Gr2 (P = 0.142)). The grade of the surgeon, PCR risk, and predicted refraction were not significant predictors of postoperative refractive error (SE > 0.5D).
conclusionsISBCS outcomes by resident ophthalmologists were comparable to those by consultants. Given the broader fiscal and workforce challenges, our findings advocate that resident ophthalmologists performing ISBCS under supervision may enhance training opportunities.
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.