Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40227513›Full record

ReviewWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2025

Telemedicine in ophthalmology.

Marina Casazza, Matthias Bolz, Josef Huemer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2025. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marina CasazzaDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Kepler University Hospital, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Matthias BolzDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Kepler University Hospital, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Josef HuemerDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Kepler University Hospital, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria. Josef.Huemer1@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5238-8295

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its beginnings in the 1970s, telemedicine has advanced extensively. Telemedicine is now more accessible and powerful than ever thanks to developments in medical imaging, Internet accessibility, advancements in telecommunications infrastructure, exponential growth in computing power, and related computer-aided diagnoses. This is especially true in the field of ophthalmology. With the COVID 19 pandemic serving as a catalyst for the widespread adoption and acceptance of teleophthalmology, new models of healthcare provision integrating telemedicine are needed to meet the challenges of the modern world. The demand for ophthalmic services is growing globally due to population growth, aging, and a shortage of ophthalmologists. In this review, we discuss the development and use of telemedicine in the field of ophthalmology and shed light on the benefits and drawbacks of teleophthalmology.

Indexed as

OphthalmologyTelemedicineCOVID-19Eye DiseasesForecastingHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Diabetic retinopathyHome monitoringRetinaScreeningTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID40227513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.